I would say if all involved are adults and enjoying the fun, then do what you like. Who knows what you may discover as a turn on!
In my line of work (cam work) I get requests for all sorts. What I find quite sad is that a lot of people are ashamed of their "perversion". Often it's something very tame, but different. I say, nothing's weird or perverse, it's just different. Too many are made to feel ashamed, especially of their role play fantasies.
So long as it's not illegal then go for it. Personally, I don't fist (I'm very petite) and I don't do scat.
i always thought age was not an issue until i saw an old woman snogging a very young man on the bus....should i really have a problem with it?
As long as it's between two committed and consenting adults the answer's no.
If it preys on someones vulnerabilty or insecurities then the simplist acts could be judged as wrong and or perverted surely?
Wilkibo wrote:
Except for male beastiality and active paedophilia, I say what goes on in the bedroom stays in the bedroom and is no concern of mine!
So you're ok with female beastiality then?? :p
Looking over this post, a few people have said that what they consider to be perverted is what is illegal. Is that your own opinion, or is that a product of societies rules and upbringing?? One of the main reasons beastiaity is considered illegal is because it is classed as rape, but I have read few articles about beastialists (is that the right word??) who only have sex with animals when they can see the animal is 'up for it' as it were. Mot people would still call that perverted, but they still stick to their own moral code.
Having said that there are people who see sex before marriage as perverted, and even the Dalai Lama has been quoted as saying "A sexual act is deemed proper when the couples use the organs intended for sexual intercourse and nothing else" (ie, sex is fine, oral anal and masturbation aren't).
So yeah, in my opinion, as long as all participants are consenting and happy, it's not up to others to judge.
Hmmmm, that's an interesting quote from His Saffronness....
"intended" by whom? There's a can of worms right there.
And "nothing else"? Does he mean "and no other organs"? or does he mean "if the act includes those organs whose only purpose is intercourse"?
If the former, then I'm sorry - no masturbation, no "helping hand" for either of you. And my wife certainly wouldn't ever have orgasmed. (Except doesn't female orgasm help conception, so that should be encouraged by any means necessary, right?)
Technically, you could say that only PinV sex is meant, but how liberal is his definition of "sexual intercourse"? I'm struggling here not to mention bonobos, but I think I'll manage it.
And presumably this places him dead set against anything homosexal. Well, I suppose ladies could just about get away with something mutual and awkward, but by definition non-pairing sex organs have to be stimulated other ways.
And does kissing count? It's one of the sexiest things I know, but were lips made for intercourse? If they were, then it's "proper" sex. If they weren't, then is it sex at all? Then it can't be "improper" sex, surely...
...I should have been a lawyer.
MrMr
In terms of homosexuality, if I remember rightly, he was generally, 'if two people in love are happy, then let them be happy', in terms of general relationship, but then it did come from wikipedia/wikiquote, so don't want to look too much into it if it's a misquote.
Well, it's full of loopholes, wherever it came from. 
Hmmm, maybe it's a misquote taken from a (mis)translation of the original tibetan??
Probably. What he actually said was, "Hey, dude, any ladies want to get upside my Alpaca, it's all good! Bro."
Hmmm, somehow I doubt it. As much as I agree with lots of Buddhist philosophy, and think the Dalai Lama is a voice for good in an unpredictable world of international politics, Personally I'm not gonna take sex advice from a monk who has taken a vow of celebacy.
Nothing against taking that vow, but it's not like he's speaking from experience.
ShaftMaster wrote:
.... in my opinion, as long as all participants are consenting and happy, it's not up to others to judge.
Morality is a relative concept, in todays age everything (almost) is permissible, but is that everything uplifting humanity or is it not rather debasing?
There is not much im not willing to try,I feel i cant judge people saying ewww thats gross if ive not even tried it.
But things like scat or animals is just wrong.
I think there is alot of people who would think watersports is up with those two,But i think watersports is a different kind of experince and its not the norm but its clean fun to me.
Alicia D'amore wrote:
I wouldn't expect a search to have brought this up with its odd title but you might be interested to read :) http://www.lovehoney.co.uk/community/forums/sex-tips-and-talk/12698-i-would-do-anything-for-love-but-i-wont-do/
Adxx
bit hard to post in if thread is closed but interestin thoughts
wildjezz wrote:
There is not much im not willing to try,I feel i cant judge people saying ewww thats gross if ive not even tried it.
But things like scat or animals is just wrong.
I think there is alot of people who would think watersports is up with those two,But i think watersports is a different kind of experince and its not the norm but its clean fun to me.
So your saying scat play is "wrong" but its okay to piss all over somone? I find that confusing.
"clean fun" Really? though I have nothing against it I would not consider it clean there's a reason you get rid of it, though I dont have anything against it or consider it perverted just not clean due to bacteria.
Watersports can be clean because you drink plenty of water first.
Scat i really dont want to think of but its smelly and for sure you could catch something nasty.
Many sexual activities seem to be perceived subjectively and can be argued. Those which I would label non negotiably perversions are as follows;
1. Cross species sexual activities or activity that usually occurs only within intimate relationships.
2. Incest, particularly parent/ child (meaning offspring rather than age) sex acts.
3. Non consensual sexual activity.
4. Sexual activities that take place within a wider scenario as an extension or part of abuse, whether consensual or not. E.g. Within an abusive relationship which two people have independently entered into initially, degenerating into one partner exploiting another.
5. Scat play.
6. Causing deliberate sexual harm to another e.g. the few identified cases of individuals who have deliberately passed HIV on to unwitting partners.
child abuse
scat play
and some harming practices too
lickmadick wrote:
child abuse
scat play
and some harming practices too
same here lickmadick, although to be honest this is the first I've ever heard of scat play, not for me at all sounds pretty awful, each to their own though.