Do you consider **** unnatural?

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]

[QUOTE="Blaminator1221"]

So then you agree that necrophilia and zoophilia are natural too?

Blaminator1221

Preference doesnt necessarily imply a conscious choice. I prefer coffee to tea but not because I consciously chose it. I just like it more.

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]

[QUOTE="Blaminator1221"]

So then you agree that necrophilia and zoophilia are natural too?

Blaminator1221

So many gay people commit suicide because of society's bigotry towards being gay If you were constantly told that a core part of your being is foul/abhorrent/unnatural/bad/wrong/etc wouldn't you begin to hate yourself?

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="Blaminator1221"]

Nature itself?! It obvious that the anus isn't meant to be a sex organ... There is no biological purpose to same gender sex and so on...

Blaminator1221

Reproduction isnt the only biological purpose (assuming thats where you're basing your opinion that there is no biological purpose to same gender sex). Isnt satisfaction also a biological purpose?

Isnt a big part of any animal's life to satisfy carnal needs? Food, drink, sleep, sex etc.

Anatomy-wise, the anus can be considered a sex organ since it is sexually stimulatable.

They eat food because they feel hunger. In order to cease hunger they eat.

They sleep because they feel tired. To stop feeling tired instictively they shut their eyes and put their brain in "hybernation" mode.

And so on.

But all gay people say they didn't choose to be gay and so many committed suicide because they despise the fact they were gay :/

Blaminator1221

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]

[QUOTE="Blaminator1221"]

So then you agree that necrophilia and zoophilia are natural too?

Blaminator1221

they dont commit suicide becuase they are ashamed of who they are attracted to. they commit suicide because they are ostracized, bullied, and alienated by bigots and/or forced into hiding who they really are from everyone. what you have just said is one of the most morally and intellectually repugnant things I have ever seen on this site.

[QUOTE="Blaminator1221"][QUOTE="Teenaged"]On the contrary.

Reproduction isnt the only biological purpose (assuming thats where you're basing your opinion that there is no biological purpose to same gender sex). Isnt satisfaction also a biological purpose?

Isnt a big part of any animal's life to satisfy carnal needs? Food, drink, sleep, sex etc.

Anatomy-wise, the anus can be considered a sex organ since it is sexually stimulatable.

Teenaged

They eat food because they feel hunger. In order to cease hunger they eat.

They sleep because they feel tired. To stop feeling tired instictively they shut their eyes and put their brain in "hybernation" mode.

And so on.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="Blaminator1221"] You can't go without food, drink and sleep... animals don't do that to satisfy they needs, they do it so survive.Blaminator1221

They eat food because they feel hunger. In order to cease hunger they eat.

They sleep because they feel tired. To stop feeling tired instictively they shut their eyes and put their brain in "hybernation" mode.

And so on.

And insticts arent necessarily drives that make one act like an animal.

But we dont know if animals understand that this is a way of nature telling them they will die. Personally I doubt it.

Anyway your comment about intelligence is entirely irrelevant since we are only discussing if it is natural, not if it suits an animal of higher intellect since that is bringing in the notion of right and wrong. Otherwise intelligence isnt a differentiating factor.

[QUOTE="Blaminator1221"]

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]
Unnatural. Like heterosexuality and homosexuality. Preferring one thing over another is what is unnatural. I think we are biologically predisposed to no particular sexual preference (whether gender or fetish) and develop these preferences over time.

arbitor365

they dont commit suicide becuase they are ashamed of who they are attracted to. they commit suicide because they are ostracized, bullied, and alienated by bigots and/or forced into hiding who they really are from everyone. what you have just said is one of the most morally and intellectually repugnant things I have ever seen on this site.

Not at all.

[QUOTE="arbitor365"]

[QUOTE="Blaminator1221"] But all gay people say they didn't choose to be gay and so many committed suicide because they despise the fact they were gay :/

Blaminator1221

they dont commit suicide becuase they are ashamed of who they are attracted to. they commit suicide because they are ostracized, bullied, and alienated by bigots and/or forced into hiding who they really are from everyone. what you have just said is one of the most morally and intellectually repugnant things I have ever seen on this site.

You can no more choose your sexuality than you can your skin color.

[QUOTE="Blaminator1221"][QUOTE="Teenaged"]I dont think animals have the capacity to know that they must fulfill those needs in order to survive.

They eat food because they feel hunger. In order to cease hunger they eat.

They sleep because they feel tired. To stop feeling tired instictively they shut their eyes and put their brain in "hybernation" mode.

And so on.

Teenaged

And insticts arent necessarily drives that make one act like an animal.

But we dont know if animals understand that this is a way of nature telling them they will die. Personally I doubt it.

Anyway your comment about intelligence is entirely irrelevant since we are only discussing if it is natural, not if it suits an animal of higher intellect since that is totally bringing the notion of right and wrong.

Instead of committing suicide why not change to being straight [...]

Blaminator1221

[QUOTE="Blaminator1221"]Instead of committing suicide why not change to being straight [...]

foxhound_fox

DAMMIT DID YOU EVEN READ THE ENTIRE POST?

Blaminator1221

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="Blaminator1221"] We go by intelligence, they go by instinct... they know what's dangerous and what's not, what to hunt and what could hunt them, what to run from and hunger pain is certainly a way the brain tells the animal, eat or you will die lol Blaminator1221

And insticts arent necessarily drives that make one act like an animal.

But we dont know if animals understand that this is a way of nature telling them they will die. Personally I doubt it.

Anyway your comment about intelligence is entirely irrelevant since we are only discussing if it is natural, not if it suits an animal of higher intellect since that is totally bringing the notion of right and wrong.

I didnt say they eat for pleasure (although I am sure that is a drive for them too) as in the taste but the feeling they get in their stomach (just like humans).

Whether or not animals do realise their needs need to be fulfilled because otherwise they will die, the fact remains that they do also want to achieve satisfaction; there is no doubt they feel hunger, thirst, tiredness etc, and they do go out of their way to satisfy those feelings.

[QUOTE="Blaminator1221"]DAMMIT DID YOU EVEN READ THE ENTIRE POST?

foxhound_fox

arbitor365 said that they commit suicide because they are ostracized, bullied, and alienated by bigots and so on which is true btw. but the point i was trying to make is that gays do not choose to be gay or not because someone earlier said it's a preference, so "Instead of committing suicide why not change to being straight" was actually a rhetorical question, because we all know that is not possible... i did not propose that gays should change to straight because such a thing is impossible, you totally misunderstood me there

Blaminator1221

[QUOTE="Blaminator1221"]arbitor365 said that they commit suicide because they are ostracized, bullied, and alienated by bigots and so on which is true btw. but the point i was trying to make is that gays do not choose to be gay or not because someone earlier said it's a preference, so "Instead of committing suicide why not change to being straight" was actually a rhetorical question, because we all know that is not possible... i did not propose that gays should change to straight because such a thing is impossible, you totally misunderstood me there

foxhound_fox

As did I.

[QUOTE="MagnumPI"] A man does it for the same reasons many straight people do it. Intimacy or pleasure or both. It's perfectly logical.LikeHaterade

The Pleasure end of it conveys a system of logic as to why they would choose to do it. I don't care what people choose to, but when I am asked if it's natural I must say no. Not to spite anyone but because sex is for reproduction. We don't always follow that logic and we often indulge for fun, but that's just the gluttony of man kind. Now as for Homosexuality... it may pleasure some homosexuals but it doesn't serve nature therefore it is not natural. It's non-productive therefore counter-productive. Duty to nature is not aboutfun. Pleasure is not nature. Pleasure is personal recreation.

[QUOTE="MagnumPI"]

Ultimately logically there is no point to putting the penis in another man's anus so clearly that's not what nature intended. But you can do it anyway. I don't recommend it but whatever.

Teenaged

There really isn't in terms of nature. Kissing does not impact nature. It's recreational. It is not necessary for reproduction. I could ask you what is the point of sucking on someone's toe? It's not natural, it's freestyle.

There really isn't in terms of nature. Kissing does not impact nature. It's recreational. It is not necessary for reproduction. I could ask you what is the point of sucking on someone's toe? It's not natural, it's freestyle.

MagnumPI

[QUOTE="Blaminator1221"][QUOTE="Teenaged"]We have instincts too.

And insticts arent necessarily drives that make one act like an animal.

But we dont know if animals understand that this is a way of nature telling them they will die. Personally I doubt it.

Anyway your comment about intelligence is entirely irrelevant since we are only discussing if it is natural, not if it suits an animal of higher intellect since that is totally bringing the notion of right and wrong.

Teenaged

I didnt say they eat for pleasure (although I am sure that is a drive for them too) as the taste but the feeling they get in their stomach (just like humans).

Whether or not animals do realise their needs need to be fulfilled because otherwise they will die, the fact remains that they do also want to achieve satisfaction; there is no doubt they feel hunger, thirst, tiredness etc, and they do go out of their way to satisfy those feelings.

It amazes me so many ppl think natural and "ok" is the same thing. Just b/c you think something is unatural doesn't mean you think it is wrong. Nor does it make it wrong. It's fundamentals.

1) Reproducing is how we continue a species. If you honestly can't do that b/c it makes you want to throw up or whatever then you can't reproduce. Therefore it's not natrual

2) Just b/c something is in nature doesn't mean it's natural. I'm sure some will throw 1 of the definitions of "natural" in here and try and solve everything. If that were the case then why do we cook our food.....animals don't.

That said, humans are NOT natural. We have evolved. We do things that animals don't that make us something else. So, it just means that homosexuals are just as unatural as thenext heterosexual person. Besides, who ever said being unatural is a bad thing?

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="Blaminator1221"] It's not nature that tells them "EAT OR YOU'RE GONNA DIEE!!!" it's their own organism, that's why they eat, if they ate for pleasure we would see many obese animals throughout nature (not talking about domestic animals here)... that what the point i was trying to prove.Blaminator1221

I didnt say they eat for pleasure (although I am sure that is a drive for them too) as the taste but the feeling they get in their stomach (just like humans).

Whether or not animals do realise their needs need to be fulfilled because otherwise they will die, the fact remains that they do also want to achieve satisfaction; there is no doubt they feel hunger, thirst, tiredness etc, and they do go out of their way to satisfy those feelings.

The feeling of hunger is a way of telling them their need is fulfilled? I am sure you got that the opposite way.

The feeling of hunger is a way of telling them "eat". Nothing else. To imply anything more complex than that implies animals have cognitive abilities a bit comparable to humans.

Anyway this is going completely off topic.

The starting point was that one biological purpose is the fulfilling of some needs through which animals obtain satisfaction. I dont see how that is false.

You are implying that any animals has to be face to face with death in order to "decide" to fulfil a need. That is not true. Animals will fulfill needs (if they can) the minute they feel those feelings (hunger, thirst etc), not when they realise that not doing so will kill them (if they are able to realise it in the first place).

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]Homosexuality is "natural" because it occurs in nature, and humans are a part of nature... so don't try and justify your homophobia with science, it just isn't going to work.Blaminator1221

So then you agree that necrophilia and zoophilia are natural too?

[QUOTE="Blaminator1221"]

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]Homosexuality is "natural" because it occurs in nature, and humans are a part of nature... so don't try and justify your homophobia with science, it just isn't going to work.Bourbons3

So then you agree that necrophilia and zoophilia are natural too?

What is morally wrong with Necrophilia?

[QUOTE="Bourbons3"][QUOTE="Blaminator1221"]

So then you agree that necrophilia and zoophilia are natural too?

Baconbits2004

What is morally wrong with Necrophilia?

[QUOTE="Bourbons3"][QUOTE="Blaminator1221"]

So then you agree that necrophilia and zoophilia are natural too?

Baconbits2004

What is morally wrong with Necrophilia?

[QUOTE="Blaminator1221"][QUOTE="Teenaged"]Their organism tells them "I need food, go get some". In fact even that is a bit extreme if we accept that animals dont have the intellect we have. Animals may not even be able to draw the connection between hunger (and the other examples) being needs of their bodies that they have to fulfil.

I didnt say they eat for pleasure (although I am sure that is a drive for them too) as the taste but the feeling they get in their stomach (just like humans).

Whether or not animals do realise their needs need to be fulfilled because otherwise they will die, the fact remains that they do also want to achieve satisfaction; there is no doubt they feel hunger, thirst, tiredness etc, and they do go out of their way to satisfy those feelings.

Teenaged

The feeling of hunger is a way of telling them their need is fulfilled? I am sure you got that the opposite way.

The feeling of hunger is a way of telling them "eat". Nothing else. To imply anything more complex than that implies animals have cognitive abilities a bit comparable to humans.

Anyway this is going completely off topic.

The starting point was that one biological purpose is the fulfilling of some needs through which animals obtain satisfaction. I dont see how that is false.

You are implying that any animals has to be face to face with death in order to "decide" to fulfil a need. That is not true. Animals will fulfill needs (if they can) the minute they feel those feelings (hunger, thirst etc), not when they realise that not doing so will kill them (if they are able to realise it in the first place).

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="Blaminator1221"] No animal goes on a hunt so he can eat for pleasure... That feeling they get in their stomach it's a way of their organism telling them your essential need is currently fulfilled.Blaminator1221

The feeling of hunger is a way of telling them their need is fulfilled? I am sure you got that the opposite way.

The feeling of hunger is a way of telling them "eat". Nothing else. To imply anything more complex than that implies animals have cognitive abilities a bit comparable to humans.

Anyway this is going completely off topic.

The starting point was that one biological purpose is the fulfilling of some needs through which animals obtain satisfaction. I dont see how that is false.

You are implying that any animals has to be face to face with death in order to "decide" to fulfil a need. That is not true. Animals will fulfill needs (if they can) the minute they feel those feelings (hunger, thirst etc), not when they realise that not doing so will kill them (if they are able to realise it in the first place).

Not even little children realise that. They just eat because they are hungry. I assume little children are more intelligent than animals. So if little children dont realise that on their own, chances are that neither do animals.

I would also like to make another point I just thought: by your standards reproduction isnt a biological purpose either.

Reproduction isnt needed for a lion to survive, unless you also want to tell me that the lion realises that it must bear offspring so that its species doesnt die out which is quite a complex train of thought for an animal even without knowing exactly how intelligent animals are.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="Blaminator1221"] No animal goes on a hunt so he can eat for pleasure... That feeling they get in their stomach it's a way of their organism telling them your essential need is currently fulfilled.Blaminator1221

The feeling of hunger is a way of telling them their need is fulfilled? I am sure you got that the opposite way.

The feeling of hunger is a way of telling them "eat". Nothing else. To imply anything more complex than that implies animals have cognitive abilities a bit comparable to humans.

Anyway this is going completely off topic.

The starting point was that one biological purpose is the fulfilling of some needs through which animals obtain satisfaction. I dont see how that is false.

You are implying that any animals has to be face to face with death in order to "decide" to fulfil a need. That is not true. Animals will fulfill needs (if they can) the minute they feel those feelings (hunger, thirst etc), not when they realise that not doing so will kill them (if they are able to realise it in the first place).

But some animals do have sex for pleasure, not just for recreation. Dolphins, for example, do so.

[QUOTE="Blaminator1221"][QUOTE="Teenaged"]I didnt say they go out for hunt solely for pleasure (the taste). I simply said its also a drive.

The feeling of hunger is a way of telling them their need is fulfilled? I am sure you got that the opposite way.

The feeling of hunger is a way of telling them "eat". Nothing else. To imply anything more complex than that implies animals have cognitive abilities a bit comparable to humans.

Anyway this is going completely off topic.

The starting point was that one biological purpose is the fulfilling of some needs through which animals obtain satisfaction. I dont see how that is false.

You are implying that any animals has to be face to face with death in order to "decide" to fulfil a need. That is not true. Animals will fulfill needs (if they can) the minute they feel those feelings (hunger, thirst etc), not when they realise that not doing so will kill them (if they are able to realise it in the first place).

worlock77

But some animals do have sex for pleasure, not just for recreation. Dolphins, for example, do so.

Just wondering I see people taking about homosexuals all the time here. Last time I checked sodomy was a fetish and even against the law in many states. However I was called a bigot for saying I did not want my children learning about sodomy ie homosexuality in school. I feel what two adults do behind close doors is their thing.

[...]

pimpog

So having to teach your kids about homosexuality doesnt necessarily entail describing what goes on in a homosexual couple's bedroom, the same way many parents dont describe what they do in their bedroom to the letter when children may ask how they were born ("mom and daddy hug real tight with love and then mommy gets pregnant" and other such description or even the allegory of flowers and bees).

Well maybe there is a reason you are called names when you assume that all gay people practice sodomy or "golden showers", when you contrast sodomy to normality, when you describe homosexuality as a fetish and so on.

[QUOTE="Blaminator1221"][QUOTE="Teenaged"]I didnt say they go out for hunt solely for pleasure (the taste). I simply said its also a drive.

The feeling of hunger is a way of telling them their need is fulfilled? I am sure you got that the opposite way.

The feeling of hunger is a way of telling them "eat". Nothing else. To imply anything more complex than that implies animals have cognitive abilities a bit comparable to humans.

Anyway this is going completely off topic.

The starting point was that one biological purpose is the fulfilling of some needs through which animals obtain satisfaction. I dont see how that is false.

You are implying that any animals has to be face to face with death in order to "decide" to fulfil a need. That is not true. Animals will fulfill needs (if they can) the minute they feel those feelings (hunger, thirst etc), not when they realise that not doing so will kill them (if they are able to realise it in the first place).

Teenaged

Not even little children realise that. They just eat because they are hungry. I assume little children are more intelligent than animals. So if little children dont realise that on their own, chances are that neither do animals.

I would also like to make another point I just thought: by your standards reproduction isnt a biological purpose either.

Reproduction isnt needed for a lion to survive, unless you also want to tell me that the lion realises that it must bear offspring so that its species doesnt die out which is quite a complex train of thought for an animal even without knowing exactly how intelligent animals are.

Just wondering I see people taking about homosexuals all the time here. Last time I checked sodomy was a fetish and even against the law in many states. However I was called a bigot for saying I did not want my children learning about sodomy ie homosexuality in school. I feel what two adults do behind close doors is their thing.

I am not a bigot because I find sodomy disgusting. I also find golden showers disgusting and don't want strangers at school telling my children about that either.

I also don't see why I have to agree with homosexuals about this topic or be called names. It is safe to say that most normal guys also find sodomy disgusting. I also don't get why this fetish (homosexuality) is even getting talk about adoption and marriage. Really all I have to do is say I am a sodomite and I can get all the rights of normal people. I can see illegal aliens using this and guys getting tax breaks ect

One guy even tried to link the murder, slavery and cultural devastation of millions of African Americans to sodomites to me a "black" man. What is next American Indians ??

pimpog

[QUOTE="Baconbits2004"]

[QUOTE="Bourbons3"] Natural or unnatural =/= morally right or wrong. Which is why arguing over whether something is natural or unnatural is a waste of time.Teenaged

What is morally wrong with Necrophilia?

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="Blaminator1221"] It's not nothing else. What happens if you don't eat? You die. What happens if you don't drink water? You die. What happens if you don't sleep and rest? You die. I agree with you that it's a drive, but i disagree that they eat to obtain satisfaction. The satisfaction is a side-effect (a way of telling them what you're doing is good) , not the primary reason. That's why they eat only when they're hungry, in other words they eat to survive. And since this topic is about sex, most animals only have sex to reproduce and only have sex during specific periods - mating seasons. Once again, satisfaction not the primary reason.Blaminator1221

Not even little children realise that. They just eat because they are hungry. I assume little children are more intelligent than animals. So if little children dont realise that on their own, chances are that neither do animals.

I would also like to make another point I just thought: by your standards reproduction isnt a biological purpose either.

Reproduction isnt needed for a lion to survive, unless you also want to tell me that the lion realises that it must bear offspring so that its species doesnt die out which is quite a complex train of thought for an animal even without knowing exactly how intelligent animals are.

I have demonstrated by your own standards how reproduction isnt a biological purpose. You are arguing against yourself at this point.

This is an interesting topic. Couldnt bother to read through all the pages though. But here is my input.

I think we need to separate what is normal and what is natural. And yes there is a difference. Natural are things that occur in nature. Normal are thing that COMMONLY occur very often. Something unnatural would be something that does NOT occur in nature. Do I think homosexuality is natural? Yes since it occurs in nature. However, homosexuality is not normal since it is not common.

Although, I'm not an expert in genes, its been proven that there are genes that makes a person gay Since these genes can occur naturally this makes homosexuality natural. However, since homosexuality is not common, that would make it not normal or abnormal

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="Baconbits2004"]

What is morally wrong with Necrophilia?

Baconbits2004

Most of you are just splitting hairs.

[QUOTE="Baconbits2004"]

[QUOTE="Bourbons3"] Natural or unnatural =/= morally right or wrong. Which is why arguing over whether something is natural or unnatural is a waste of time.toast_burner

What is morally wrong with Necrophilia?

Well, I think that's up to the people in question... who is to say they aren't part of the same family anyways.

[QUOTE="Baconbits2004"][QUOTE="Teenaged"]The dead cannot give consent. :P

Teenaged

Tell me 'over there'

[QUOTE="Blaminator1221"][QUOTE="Teenaged"]For them it is the primary reason, unless you want to tell me that animals realise that not fulfilling those needs will result in them dieing.

Not even little children realise that. They just eat because they are hungry. I assume little children are more intelligent than animals. So if little children dont realise that on their own, chances are that neither do animals.

I would also like to make another point I just thought: by your standards reproduction isnt a biological purpose either.

Reproduction isnt needed for a lion to survive, unless you also want to tell me that the lion realises that it must bear offspring so that its species doesnt die out which is quite a complex train of thought for an animal even without knowing exactly how intelligent animals are.

Teenaged

I have demonstrated by your own standards how reproduction isnt a biological purpose. You are arguing against yourself at this point.

[QUOTE="pimpog"]

Just wondering I see people taking about homosexuals all the time here. Last time I checked sodomy was a fetish and even against the law in many states. However I was called a bigot for saying I did not want my children learning about sodomy ie homosexuality in school. I feel what two adults do behind close doors is their thing.

[...]

Teenaged

So having to teach your kids about homosexuality doesnt necessarily entail describing what goes on in a homosexual couple's bedroom, the same way many parents dont describe what they do in their bedroom to the letter when children may ask how they were born ("mom and daddy hug real tight with love and then mommy gets pregnant" and other such description or even the allegory of flowers and bees).

Well maybe there is a reason you are called names when you assume that all gay people practice sodomy or "golden showers", when you contrast sodomy to normality, when you describe homosexuality as a fetish and so on.

Last time i checked hetrosexuals were having sex with the opposite sex unles they were virgins or did I that change when I woke up today. Homosexuals last I checked were still doing the sodomy thing also. As for the golden showers I said I also find that fetish disgusting. Last time I checked sodomy was a fetish and even illegal in many states (I am in the USA). So I am called names here for stating the OBVIOUS ??

[QUOTE="pimpog"]

Just wondering I see people taking about homosexuals all the time here. Last time I checked sodomy was a fetish and even against the law in many states. However I was called a bigot for saying I did not want my children learning about sodomy ie homosexuality in school. I feel what two adults do behind close doors is their thing.

I am not a bigot because I find sodomy disgusting. I also find golden showers disgusting and don't want strangers at school telling my children about that either.

I also don't see why I have to agree with homosexuals about this topic or be called names. It is safe to say that most normal guys also find sodomy disgusting. I also don't get why this fetish (homosexuality) is even getting talk about adoption and marriage. Really all I have to do is say I am a sodomite and I can get all the rights of normal people. I can see illegal aliens using this and guys getting tax breaks ect

One guy even tried to link the murder, slavery and cultural devastation of millions of African Americans to sodomites to me a "black" man. What is next American Indians ??

toast_burner

Is that a joke are you being sarcastic cause I can't tell on the web you know.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="Blaminator1221"] Reproduction is always essential, because it ensures the continuity of a species and yes reproduction is a biological purpose, one of the main actually.Blaminator1221

I have demonstrated by your own standards how reproduction isnt a biological purpose. You are arguing against yourself at this point.

Since they dont realise that they must fulfil those needs because otherwise they will die, then what is it if not simply to satisfy those needs, ie for satisfaction?

Dont confuse satisfaction in this context with sexual satisfaction or "omg thats so awesome" type of satisfaction.