You seem to misunderstand. The community in my mind is neither exclusively sex-positive nor is it not sex-positive. It’s one where both groups interact with each other without insulting each other.
Every sex forum I can find, aside from places like NoFap that are specifically designed to be critical of some element of sex, has somewhere in the rules “you have to be sex-positive.” If you can find communities that don’t have that in the rules, great. But I can’t find any.
Admittedly so. Having the example helps clear things up. Thank you. To me, sex-positive means, “it’s okay here to discuss sex like any other topic without fear of you being shamed for it.” I’m okay to refer to that as “sex-focused”
Everyone has their own views on sex, so I think it’s important in a broad community to respect the other people in the discussion. If I were moderating a discussion involving people from the NoFap community, and others including from a gooning community, I’d try to keep the focus on what sex means to the individuals speaking, and steer discussion away from criticizing other people in the discussion.
It’s not really that different from here, and I think. Yes, it takes work for all involved, but such is the price of productive and difficult conversations.
It’s amazing how effective using I-based phrases are. “I feel that…”, “To me…”, “I believe…”. They can take things from a judgement of others, to a fact about oneself.
“Sex before marriage is a sin, and those that indulge are wicked” →
“I believe that sex before marriage is a sin. I’ve grown up believing that those who indulge are wicked.”
The content in those two statements are the same, but the focus is different. I’d lean heavily into non-violent communication to keep things civil and productive. I’d try to give as much leeway as possible, but be on the lookout for people that are getting overheated, and gently nudge them back to civility.
I might even add, “avoid absolutist statements”: always, never, all, none, etc. Not ban them, as there are appropriate uses, but rarely are they true about people.
You seem to misunderstand. The community in my mind is neither exclusively sex-positive nor is it not sex-positive. It’s one where both groups interact with each other without insulting each other.
Every sex forum I can find, aside from places like NoFap that are specifically designed to be critical of some element of sex, has somewhere in the rules “you have to be sex-positive.” If you can find communities that don’t have that in the rules, great. But I can’t find any.
Admittedly so. Having the example helps clear things up. Thank you. To me, sex-positive means, “it’s okay here to discuss sex like any other topic without fear of you being shamed for it.” I’m okay to refer to that as “sex-focused”
Everyone has their own views on sex, so I think it’s important in a broad community to respect the other people in the discussion. If I were moderating a discussion involving people from the NoFap community, and others including from a gooning community, I’d try to keep the focus on what sex means to the individuals speaking, and steer discussion away from criticizing other people in the discussion.
It’s not really that different from here, and I think. Yes, it takes work for all involved, but such is the price of productive and difficult conversations.
It’s amazing how effective using I-based phrases are. “I feel that…”, “To me…”, “I believe…”. They can take things from a judgement of others, to a fact about oneself.
“Sex before marriage is a sin, and those that indulge are wicked” →
“I believe that sex before marriage is a sin. I’ve grown up believing that those who indulge are wicked.”
The content in those two statements are the same, but the focus is different. I’d lean heavily into non-violent communication to keep things civil and productive. I’d try to give as much leeway as possible, but be on the lookout for people that are getting overheated, and gently nudge them back to civility.
I might even add, “avoid absolutist statements”: always, never, all, none, etc. Not ban them, as there are appropriate uses, but rarely are they true about people.