Sex and sexuality in the Mistborn series...missing?

[Peter Ahlstrom]

Please edit your post so it's not visually painful to read. The bold does not work. Just unquote before your response and quote after.

[Shaggy]

Thanks, Ookla. The bold makes an already difficult post nearly impossible.

[Bookstore Guy]

id also ask that you tone down the hostility a tad. many of those sentences feel like direct attacks on people. the profanity doesnt help much either.  it seems like you are getting a bit riled up over some pretty mild comments.  Come on people, lets keep the discussion mature and not result to blatantly insulting people's comments and beliefs.

[muboop]

id also ask that you tone down the hostility a tad. many of those sentences feel like direct attacks on people. the profanity doesnt help much either.  it seems like you are getting a bit riled up over some pretty mild comments.  Come on people, lets keep the discussion mature and not result to blatantly insulting people's comments and beliefs.

i just fixed the stuff,
as for profanity if it offends i apologise, i genuinely was riled up!

i dont judge people for how they live, yet i dont know i felt while i was reading thsi that i was being called a sinner etc, it got to me, i havent time now to tone down profanity, as i have to go help my bro with homework. ill do it late if i get a chance!

[Reaves]

Honestly though, I didn't even finish reading your post because of the bold. If you could go back and fix that too that would be good.

[muboop]

fixed all asked to fix!

[little wilson]

Muboop, I wasn't trying to call you a sinner. I was simply stating my personal beliefs, because that's what it seemed to me you were asking.

As for my supposed naivety. I'm not that naive. Sheltered, yes. Naive, no. And yes, there IS a difference. The difference being experience as opposed to knowledge. So I'm "sheltered" because I really haven't experienced a whole lot. But I'm not naive, because I actually know quite a bit.

I'm not even going to answer your questions about the immorality. You know my opinions on that. They haven't changed since I wrote that, and I really doubt that they're going to change.

Where do I live? Southern Idaho. I wasn't trying to be stereotypical when I said the people I know who are married have only slept with each other. That was a statement of fact. I was debating you saying it was "rare" to find people who hadn't. It's only rare depending on where you look. Yes, there are PLENTY of places were it is rare to find those like you said. But there are other places where it's incredibly easy. I live in a place like the latter.

I kind of take offense to the whole "use a dictionary more often" statement. I know the dictionary definition of adultery. To me, though, it's more than what's just in the dictionary. It's more than cheating on your spouse. To me, it's immorality in general.

Yes, I have heard of the Council of Niccea. I actually did a project for a Religion class on it a little over a year ago. What you said is nothing new to me. I believe the Council was a horrible idea. A bunch of people getting together to decide and vote about God and Christ? That's just dumb.

As for learning more. No problems there. I'm also a university student, and I can always learn more. Love learning more. And you're right. I do need to travel more. But traveling requires money, which I'm just a little short on right now....Although, I am planning on going to Britain and France in May through BYU-I, but....again. Money.

I'm not making any "calls". Pretty much every statement that I have made so far on here, I've qualified in some way that this is as it is in my own life. The people that I know. My personal experience. I know there are other views that exist. I have a good idea what most of those views entail. But I do not share some of those, and so I was simply stating my own opinions. Take them for what you will.

Oh, and Ook, you pegged my opinions perfectly in your post. Thank you.

[Peter Ahlstrom]

No problem. See, it wasn't that hard to tell what you meant.

[Cynewulf]

So long as you are in the club, I suppose.

I am pressed for time, once again, so I will try to find time to make a reply at a later stage. One quick mention that "polemic" is derived from a Greek word meaning "hostile", which certainly fits your initial one-sentence post. While my description may have been closer to an argument of the strawman variety, I still hold to my adjectival usage of "polemic". Your post was both hostile and derogatory.

[Reaves]

The Council of Nicea was necessary because of the Arius heresy. I realize I am quite likely not in the majority with that statement.

[Brenna]

Mod hat on: 

I would like to point out an important section from our FAQ:
http://www.timewastersguide.com/forum/index.php?topic=11.0

FOURTH ITEM: Be polite. 
I can't stress this enough. Being insensitive to others' opinions is a failing of both newcomers and long-time posters.  Try not to contribute to this atmosphere. It is good to have strong opinions, and it's even better to have opinions that are different from those of other posters.  The forum experience is about discussion and disagreement. However, you can disagree with someone without calling them names or otherwise insulting them. Be nice and respect people's differences.




Threads like this are bound to take twists and turns and get a little heated when they move from dealing with the specific topic (whether sex and sexuality are missing within the text of the Mistborn series) to more general (the role of sex and sexuality in our real life society--good, bad, moral, immoral, etc).

However, you can have a discussion or debate without name calling, without being condescending (from any viewpoint), and without being hostile. 

If the thread continues to degenerate into bickering instead of debate I will have to lock the thread. I don't want to do that, as I like to see the board hopping with discussion and debate!  So, to recap, polite disagreements = good, hostile and rude comments directed at other posters = bad. 

/mod hat

[Peter Ahlstrom]

*shrug* Derogatory? Well, inasmuch as it's "detracting from the character or standing of something" and "expressive of a low opinion," I guess my remark fits the definition. The connotation of "with intent to hurt feelings," though, was not there.

Hostile? By the various definitions of hostile, "openly opposed or resisisting" or "antagonistic" (where "antagonism" means "opposition of a conflicting force, tendency, or principle" or "actively expressed opposition") are definitions I would say apply, but not any of the other definitions. And if we are not allowed to be "hostile" in this way, then there is no point to even having a discussion of anything remotely controversial.

(And if all you mean is "hostile" without the standard connotations of "polemic" then just say "hostile," for goodness' sake.)

I don't think that telling someone they've bought into the lies of today's society is rude. Do you think implying someone else has bought into the tenets and dogmae of two millennia ago is rude? They're both statements based on evidence from the other person's writings. (And yes, I have fully bought into certain tenets and dogmae of two millennia ago, though not all 2000-year-old tenets and dogmae.)

[Brenna]

To be clearer, statements like "Use your dictionary more often" or implying that where a person lives obviously negates their ability to understand something are what I'd consider hostile and rude (picking on those specifically because they're the most recent and I needed a quick example, not because I'm calling out the poster in question).

[muboop]

Muboop, I wasn't trying to call you a sinner. I was simply stating my personal beliefs, because that's what it seemed to me you were asking.

fair enough however its the only way i could take what you said!

As for my supposed naivety. I'm not that naive. Sheltered, yes. Naive, no. And yes, there IS a difference. The difference being experience as opposed to knowledge. So I'm "sheltered" because I really haven't experienced a whole lot. But I'm not naive, because I actually know quite a bit.

mabey but mabey it is an unbringing of where you are from or soemthing, but when im from its common at my age. im only 20 btw. and although i dont condone people who sleep around, i think perfectly aceptable between two people who are in love and mature enough to understand and appreciate it. i think a marriage title shouldn't have a place in it.

I'm not even going to answer your questions about the immorality. You know my opinions on that. They haven't changed since I wrote that, and I really doubt that they're going to change.

i ask this out of curiousity mabey, and of form of debate. do you think a couple together for half a year and married, that they are ok to sleep together. are a couple together for say 6 years living together whom fuly intend to get married in the future but dont want to make a full committment yet. are they immoral?
can you explain to why they would be if you think they are and the married couple are?

i genuinely believe marriage is only a title, and one that seems to mean less and less every day with the high rate of divorce.

Where do I live? Southern Idaho. I wasn't trying to be stereotypical when I said the people I know who are married have only slept with each other. That was a statement of fact. I was debating you saying it was "rare" to find people who hadn't. It's only rare depending on where you look. Yes, there are PLENTY of places were it is rare to find those like you said. But there are other places where it's incredibly easy. I live in a place like the latter.

you have to agree do that where you are from has a minority in in views, very few places in the christian world are as zealous as your area. i think you take the word of "God" to the unecessar extreme for the most part. Ireland is where im from and we are by no means not a religious country, but yet we dont try to think to hold others to our own standards, but rather hold ourselves to our own! and let others do as they will.
we are a rather tolerant people!

I kind of take offense to the whole "use a dictionary more often" statement. I know the dictionary definition of adultery. To me, though, it's more than what's just in the dictionary. It's more than cheating on your spouse. To me, it's immorality in general.

see thats you imo taking more from the bible then it is giving, it isnt worded there so why create it so?
also i feel totaly justified in my comment, as i am right in what i am saying.

you cannot turn around to me and basically call me stupid for saying sex before marriage isnt in the commandments then say oh but i dont realy take the words at their actual meanings... because that is what i said! i gave their meanings. end of!

Yes, I have heard of the Council of Niccea. I actually did a project for a Religion class on it a little over a year ago. What you said is nothing new to me. I believe the Council was a horrible idea. A bunch of people getting together to decide and vote about God and Christ? That's just dumb.

i totaly agree! and due to this the bible hs been distorted!
we dont actually know about christs humanity at all! something which i think is way more important. to see how he acted when faced with situations we would face everyday!
we can speculate as you do that he was the perfect person, but all we know of are his greatness! he was beaten etc everything to do with his death and his greatness before it. but did he ever give into temptatiosn of any sort whether to fight back etc?

sure we were given pleanty of important stuff, but not everything! if jesus was so perfect why not let us see his flaws? let us see how he got past them, how he conquered his fears and made up for any mistakes!

As for learning more. No problems there. I'm also a university student, and I can always learn more. Love learning more. And you're right. I do need to travel more. But traveling requires money, which I'm just a little short on right now....Although, I am planning on going to Britain and France in May through BYU-I, but....again. Money.

travelling does require money! i have paid for every trip myself i have ever been on all the while getting a chemical engineering degree in the most prestigeous university in ireland. it can be done if you want! iv travelled to the states for 3 months, been to asia, australia and about 80% of europe! not that im saying im great or anything, but im more trying to say, its worth it! give it a shot! broadens your mind! seriously so! and the experiences you get are worth it

I'm not making any "calls". Pretty much every statement that I have made so far on here, I've qualified in some way that this is as it is in my own life. The people that I know. My personal experience. I know there are other views that exist. I have a good idea what most of those views entail. But I do not share some of those, and so I was simply stating my own opinions. Take them for what you will.

i do, and i respectively disagree with most of them.

[muboop]

To be clearer, statements like "Use your dictionary more often" or implying that where a person lives obviously negates their ability to understand something are what I'd consider hostile and rude (picking on those specifically because they're the most recent and I needed a quick example, not because I'm calling out the poster in question).

i feel totaly justified in what i said!

the poster i was talking to about the dictionary told me i was wrong in something i said, even though if you actually read the words i was fully correct!

telling someone they are wrong without checking the facts is just bad imo!
if you are going to accume me of being wrong check the source!

and as for where from, i wasnt being derogatory, not at all! and i was right to!
i merely said that the person had the attributes of a certain area! and i hit the nail on the head!

i think people need to travel and see the world before they set their ideals in stone! how can they judge anothers situation or life when they havent seen or experienced anything about it!