See also: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/10659100/Harriet-Harman-Jack-Dromey-Patricia-Hewitt-and-the-Paedophile-Information-Exchange.html … The sexual revolution was always sympathetic to this kind of thing.
It’s a biological law. But the problem, as Hume stated, is that no “is” implies an ought. What’s the anus “for”? Humans can choose to use objects in different ways. Biology doesn’t tell us what’s right in this regard, just what is.
-
-
There are various evo-psych and evo-bio theories for anal sex. I'm no expert but prostate stimulation seems to suggest that men are designed for penetration, very possibly vindicating homosexual partnerships/sexuality. As for women & anal sex? Not entirely sure, tbh
-
These are facts about the world that don’t tell us if the actions are wrong or right (if there even are such things). What I’m going to say is condescending & arrogant, but you need to look at a primer on the philosophy of science and/or ethics to understand the issue.
-
Thanks for assuming my opinion could only be uneducated

-
You’re intelligent and probably well educated, but not everyone can know everything—although I like to think I do. On this issue, it’s beyond me to explain the fact/value divide in tweets. Ultimately, it’s a question of whether there’s a telos or not.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.