Talk:Anal sex

Anal sex in animals

At the top of the article is the statement: "This article is about the human sexual act. For anal sex among non-human animals, see Animal sexual behavior" The referenced article contains only a single passing reference to anal sex in animals; no general discussion. Perhaps this reference should be removed (or better yet, someone who knows the subject, adding a section on anal sex to the "Animal sexual behavior" page!) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.113.56.149 (talk) 08:44, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 January 2015

please change the text in article# 7.4.3 Islam , ". ...because it is blasphemy toward the prophet Allah... ." . ...to because it is blasphemy toward the prophet OF Allah... ." because Allah is the God and prophet Hazrat Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him) is His prophet. لا إله إلا الله محمد رسول الله lā ʾilāha ʾillā-llāh, muhammadun rasūlu-llāh There is no God but Allah, Muhammad is the messenger of God.[1]... . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shahada and, http://www.islamawareness.net/Dua/kalimas.html . 39.34.150.206 (talk) 10:47, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Done Cannolis (talk) 18:58, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Don't all hyper-monotheists believe their g(G)od is the only one? Is there any academic merit to endorsing any of these sentiments? Isn't Wikipedia meant to be an academic medium for everyone, not one subscribing to one particular religion or another? Wouldn't this argument have more merit if made on the basis of accuracy, not religion? 74.42.81.206 (talk) 03:33, 14 February 2015 (UTC)Nate Vazquez — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.10.16.150 (talk) 03:31, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

evolution

I am curious about how the desire for anal sex has evolved in humans. Is that discussed in another article? Could it be discussed in this one? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.42.81.206 (talk) 03:24, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

• I doubt there is sufficient and thorough documentation to see how anal sex has evolved, how many people do it now, and how many in the past AdultUpdates (talk) 15:35, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 February 2015

1. In "Other Cultural Views -> General" section, this line is clearly wrong : "Historically, it has been restricted or condemned"

because the first reference "Human Sexuality: An Enclopedia" itself states:

" Anal sex has been known since records of human sexual activity have been kept. Depending on the culture, or even on the time of evolution of culture, the practice has been tolerated, accepted, expected or condemned. Definite roles were sometimes assigned to the participants. For example, it was common in many cultures for the insertor to be an older man teaching the insertee, a young man. In other cultures, the participants were of equal status and alternated roles. It was considered unusual by the people in those cultures if such relationships did not exist. Anal intercourse was sometimes used as an act of dominance over a conquered enemy or to exert superiority over women. "

2. This part is just a sweeping assumption based on Christian/Catholic taboos -> "especially with regard to religious beliefs". No evidence is provided to substanciate that majority of world religions proscribed anal sex.

Arul20 (talk) 06:04, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

That content is supported by three different sources. Historically, anal sex has been restricted or condemned; various WP:Reliable sources are clear on this, and that it was historically restricted or condemned especially because of religious beliefs. The text does not state that anal sex was restricted or condemned everywhere. The Other cultural views section clearly shows that it was not a "restricted or condemned everywhere" matter. That section even begins by stating, "Different cultures have had different views on anal sex throughout human history, with some cultures more positive about the activity than others." Flyer22 (talk) 06:11, 23 February 2015 (UTC)