The male penis ... it's not merely designed for intercourse ...

[Tgunz262]

Geez, some of you guys just take me way too seriously.
Hint: Just because I go down a set of logical paths doesn't mean I believe in them.
This was designed as entertainment with a little thought, and nothing else.

:rofl2: Oh you dirty bastard! I fucking knew it! I hate it when you do that!

 

[chronotrigger]

i thought this debate would be something good

 

[ÆGEAN]

lol interesting

 

[Member2019]

No. The long and short of it is no matter what your length, the sensitive end is going to be inside the whole time your thrusting about. And if all you have is just enough to get the job done, it better be the buisness end that gets stimulated. You don't need your entire dick tingley.

But if God Herself had only created the penis for intercourse -- especially missionary-only -- as some in the "Religious Right" constantly spew, should it not been created to maximize stimulation for intercourse?

The entire fact that the penis is most sensitive on the ventral side, especially closer to the head, goes to suggest that God and/or Darwinism created and/or evolved, respectively, the penis around stimulation outside the vulva!

Dude. You did not just use 'slave' and 'free will' in the same sentence.

Indeed! Do we really have "free will"? Or do we constantly fight the engrained "programming" to fuck, fuck and fuck more in, essence, making us a slave? Especially teenage and young men, in their sexual prime, who constantly awake with as well as constantly deal with a fully errect penis while they are awake without any stimulation?

Caress her body? That's it? God, all powerfull, all knowing, needed a sensual massage? That's why the rest on the seventh day I guess.

Hey, that's just a "little story" -- call it "Prof V's Genesis" for all I care. But the result of creation and/or evolution has produced a penis that is sensitive in a way that is not ideal for just intercourse.

Explain homosexualtiy.

Oh, that's easy! In fact, it further proves that creationism and/or evolution has resulted in a penis that is useful for far more than intercourse. The penis is not ideally sensitized for insertion into the vulva/vaginal cavity. That really removes the need for a woman, other than pro-creation! Simple, no?

Did God Herself realize this?
Or did eons of evolution result in this?

Did the penis start out sensitive all over?
But the "male sex drive" caused him to "hump" everything in side, resulting a more sensitive ventral over time?
Maybe.

But I'd say no, because of the oral cavity and other considerations, as I laid out.
I made a strong case that there are many considerations that the penis was designed, from day 1 (or "use 1" if you don't believe in any "design"), not to merely be for intercourse.

Let's go further.

What about the design of the male prostate and the accessibility via the anus?
Gay or not, the damn this is in an ideal place for male penetration from the rear!
You want an explanation on "homo-sexuality" -- damn, that's one right there!

It sounds like infallible god is making quite a few mistakes, and is learning from them and evolving her creations.

Possibly.
There's no "proof" that, assuming a "creator" existed, that She knew what she was doing or how everything would turn out.

But then again, who's to say she didn't design the male penis for exactly what has transpired in evolution, society, etc...???

I've long aruged that mankind is a "test of tolerance."
From the fact that we don't recognize that if we all inter-bred, we'd eliminate a lot of diseases to the fact that even the Catholic Church has recognized that homosexuality has both chemical dependencies and physical "stimulation" advantages.

(Here's an interesting thought - Creation by an all powerfull, but not infallible being, who corrects it's mistakes under the guise of evoultion. Anyway...)

And that's a good one! No argument with that one.

Actually, I completely agree with that. Espically 'doggie style' :love-smi:

Especially since the breasts are hanging and split, ideal for the male lover's simulation as he cups them.

It's called bilateral symetry.

But not everything is "bilateral symmetry" in the human body! There are many things God could have created unilateral, in the middle. The breast could have functioned as such, especially since humans only pro-create 1 child at a time (normally).

No. That god person fucked up in the design stage again. You're telling me that chicks don't swallow becasue the 'blow job' gene didn't pass to the next generation?

Yes! Simple evolution had a part my friend! Especially before verbal communication!

I don't disagree that you can't use you dick in other ways than for intercourse and procreation. You just havn't convinced me that it was specifically designed for other use.

But was that my intent? No!

My intent was to show that the male penis was not designed and/or evolved out of merely pro-creation via missionary penetration of the vulva/vaginal cavity. That's all! Everything else is "speculation" on why man/woman are so designed/evolved. That's all!

This is not about "fact," it's about "theory."
I don't know what the creation/evolution specifics are.
But, again, there is very strong evidence against the "Religious Right" that it was about "only missionary."

As far as everything else you said, please don't look for an "argument" in this thread.
This was supposed to be entertaining, but very "logical" at the same time.
Can we at least agree some of the "Religious Right" peddling "missionary only" are in total defiance of some basic realities of the male/female anatomy here?

 

[Pariah000]

ok, so let me think this out loud.....a chicks....."taco".....doesnt always go as "deep" as 7inches?

i remember seeing some thing on the net saying ike 10+ inches was too much and it had all these funny things till it got down to 2-3 inches where she says "oh fuck it just use your tongue/hand!" or something. twas quite funny at the time, i just kill the glee lol

 

[Tgunz262]

OK Prof, you win. I don't even know what the hell this was about.

I keep forgetting you set up goofy posts just so you can see everyone's reaction to them, and of course I keep falling for it and typing away.

And you do it so well. I now can never be sure if you actually mean something or not. Congats on being the best bullshitter (or not, who can tell) I've ever known.

 

[4G63]

We're dicks! We're reckless, arrogant, stupid dicks. And the Film Actors Guild are pussies. And Kim Jong Il is an asshole. Pussies don't like dicks, because pussies get fucked by dicks. But dicks also fuck assholes: assholes that just want to shit on everything. Pussies may think they can deal with assholes their way. But the only thing that can fuck an asshole is a dick, with some balls. The problem with dicks is: they fuck too much or fuck when it isn't appropriate - and it takes a pussy to show them that. But sometimes, pussies can be so full of shit that they become assholes themselves... because pussies are an inch and half away from ass holes. I don't know much about this crazy, crazy world, but I do know this: If you don't let us fuck this asshole, we're going to have our dicks and pussies all covered in shit!