July 5th, 2005, 01:00 AM
Facts:
~ Women are expected to enjoy sex, even if it is not for reproduction.
~ Contraceptives are not 100% reliable; unwanted pregnancies are possible despite using contraceptives.
Question:
How is a woman supposed to enjoy sex, when she knows that if she conceives despite using contaceptives, she will have to have an unwanted child or an abortion?
People enjoy skydiving, too. Even though parachutes aren't 100% reliable.
Perhaps people, women included, simply see the risk is overshadowed by the reward and instant gratification of the act itself.
If the woman does everything she can to prevent a pregnancy AND the male uses protection as well the chances are very, very slim that she will get pregnant. That being said the chances still aren't 100% but that's the risk women take. They could use the RU44 morning after pill to induce a miscarriage if the did become pregnant.
There's also a dildo they can use to mastrubate with that will allow them to achieve the same orgasim as with a man without the problem or worry of a pregnancy happening at all.
It's a risk, although small, that women take having sex with a man if they don't want children.
water, hope your not mad at me.
nice, pink girly avatar too
you say "women are expected to enjoy sex" this is a funny statement because women do enjoy sex. but it isnt something that is expected of them. women are allowed to have crappy sex too. they can also have weird sex, kinky sex or no sex at all if they wish but it should not be an expectation.
if the expectation is there we need to question where the expectation originates.
but then i geuss you have a particular woman in mind one who is not enjoying sex because of her issues with birth control.
so if its the issues surrounding birth control that are preventing her enjoyment of sex it is those issues that need to be understood first.
Often religious pressures will be the factor here. The woman will not allow herself to enjoy something that her religion frowns upon. If she is not trying to get pregnant then her religion would not support her actions, thus she feels she should not be enjoying sex at all. The only time she might enjoy sex is during periods where she is in fact trying to get pregnant and knows her religion is in support of her actions.
could also be the pressure of not wanting to give birth and raise a child.
July 5th, 2005, 11:03 AM
Would you then say that an infertile woman will enjoy sex more?Originally Posted by water
Would the best sex be with an infertile man?
Sex, like most things exists (to be enjoyed or not) on many different levels. Superficially as simple physical pleasure, more deeply as an expression of love or a means for reproduction. I suppose the enjoyment is from having the mind on the same level as the experience.
Shut up and enjoy it already!!!!
Interesting terminology.~ Women are expected to enjoy sex, even if it is not for reproduction.
Expected. Like it's somehow mandatory. (You do realize that the phrase, "Women are expected..." carries with it a sort of implied imperative, don't you?)
I don't think that it's necessarily true that women are 'expected' enjoy sex. They either do or don't. However, taken at face value, then you can say that women are expected to enjoy sex, because most of them do. However, I should also think that most would also expect them to not enjoy sex because of the issues you bring up about unwanted pregnancy.
It's an interesting trend in modern society, this 'enjoyment' of sex by women. It's common sense that it is women who must bear the cost of sexual behavior. Whether they want to or not. Until recently, there was little choice in the matter. They could abandon the child at birth or try to abort the baby through natural methods, but until very recently the options were few. And so, it's no great surprise to think that women have been, for the most part, choosy about selecting a mate and having sex.
But, with the advent of welfare and other modern systems that allow a single mother to care for her child without the need of a husband, sex among women has been transformed until women nowadays are practically as slutty as the men, if not more so.
And lightning rods are not 100% reliable either (actually, maybe they are. My first thought for an analogy had to do with living your life in a Faraday cage, but that didn't lend itself to contraception so much as a chastity belt.)~ Contraceptives are not 100% reliable; unwanted pregnancies are possible despite using contraceptives.
Life is hazardous. Through a combination of contraceptive methods, the odds of getting pregnant can be reduced significantly, but only abstinence is 100% effective.
Do you really want 100% effectiveness? Do you require 100% effectiveness before you can relax enough to enjoy it?
Interestingly, women who are cheating on their husbands are more likely to get pregnant. What the mind wants and what the body wants are not necessarily the same thing.
It is a common belief that there is something wrong with a woman who continually doesn't enjoy sex for pleasure (ie. sex that is performed with the explicit intent not to procreate).
This being something wrong with such a woman is usually termed "frigidity" or "phobia about sex".
Thus, I surmise, that ejnoying sex for pleasure is what is normal, desired, and continually not enjoying it is something pathological. This is why I say "Women are *expected* to enjoy sex".
I am interested in what the justification is for calling those women who do not enjoy sex for pleasure, "frigid" or "having a phobia about sex".
It seems that if a woman is not willing to accept the risks of a possible abortion or unwanted child, this is abnormal, pathologic.
Eventually, thus, a woman who is not willing to have an abortion or an unwanted child, is deemed abnormal, pathologic.
This is so only for those who separate the mind from the body.
this you say is a common belief, is it your belief? if you do not believe this, put it where it belongs. there are lots of common beliefs which have no validity, i think you of all people know this well enough. if you do believe there is something wrong with women who dont find sex pleasurable, do you know what it is you feel is wrong with them?
enjoying sex is normal but not enjoying sex is normal too. what is important here is the feelings surrounding this. if there is a feeling that i should be enjoying sex but i am not then i need to understand why i have this conflict with in me if the internal conflict with in my self is such that it is unhealthy then it May be pathological. Please, i am not speaking absolutes. there are more colours here than i am aware of right now.Thus, I surmise, that ejnoying sex for pleasure is what is normal, desired, and continually not enjoying it is something pathological. This is why I say "Women are *expected* to enjoy sex".
the only people who could justify the use of such terms are the people who hold those beliefs, their justifications are likely to be as distorted as their beliefs.I am interested in what the justification is for calling those women who do not enjoy sex for pleasure, "frigid" or "having a phobia about sex".
8) Yo water,
Quote w:
“It is a common belief that there is something wrong with a woman who continually doesn't enjoy sex for pleasure (ie. sex that is performed with the explicit intent not to procreate). “
* Yep, this would be about right as overwhelmingly, most woman, due to the physiology that nature has provided, do enjoy sex, mono and/or stereo. I agree, it is a common belief, that there is something wrong with a woman if she does not enjoy sex, but there would be good reason for this. Physical or mental.
Quote w:
“This being something wrong with such a woman is usually termed "frigidity" or "phobia about sex".”
* Yep.
Quote w:
“Thus, I surmise, that ejnoying sex for pleasure is what is normal, desired, and continually not enjoying it is something pathological. This is why I say "Women are *expected* to enjoy sex".”
* Not pathological by any means, merely an infrequent reactin towards sex .
Quote w:
“I am interested in what the justification is for calling those women who do not enjoy sex for pleasure, "frigid" or "having a phobia about sex".”
* Because as I mentioned, the vast majority of woman do enjoy sex. Those that don’t, stand out like a sore thumb. (pardon the finger) Having said that, I agree it is unfair to box the group that don’t enjoy sex for sex`s sake, into a box titled “something wrong with you?” without trying to understand why they may not enjoy sex.
Quote w:
“It seems that if a woman is not willing to accept the risks of a possible abortion or unwanted child, this is abnormal, pathologic.”
* Fulfilling and rewarding sex is quite possible without penetration. Depending on culture and what religious taboos you were raised with, there are many ways to skin a cat. Religion and its doctrines have grossly perverted mans natural sexuality. So its not the of avoiding of penetrative sex (that can lead to pregnancy) that may be seen as abnormal, rather the total lack of interest in sex which could and should be seen as abnormal.
Quote w:
“Eventually, thus, a woman who is not willing to have an abortion or an unwanted child, is deemed abnormal, pathologic.”
* Your confines are so narrow here water, you leave no room for the bigger picture of ‘sex”. Sex is an expression of love, a pleasure, and an art. Procreation is but one possible outcome. I can quite understand that if a woman has had bad experiences involving pregnancies and abortion, that she may well have an absolute and justifiable dislike for sex. Any decent man that cared for his partner thought, would try to understand the underlying reasons for the lack of desire for sex. Alas, we have some dirty dogs out there.
so then, would you propose that she could be fixed and made to enjoy sex, there is a common belief that lesbians just need a good fuck by a real man to put them back on the right tracks. it would be interseting to hear your views on the 'normality' of homo/bisexuality. are they also deviant from the physiology that nature has provided?
is this an attempt at justification?Because as I mentioned, the vast majority of woman do enjoy sex.
okay! so you can tell by looking at someone if they do or dont enjoy sex?Those that don’t, stand out like a sore thumb. (pardon the finger)
how?
can you diagonse what is 'wrong' with them just by looking too?
and once we have tried to understand them then we can put them in the box titled "something wrong with you?"Having said that, I agree it is unfair to box the group that don’t enjoy sex for sex`s sake, into a box titled “something wrong with you?” without trying to understand why they may not enjoy sex.
this was what i meant when i said that someone who holds onto these common beliefs will have a distorted justification for them.Fulfilling and rewarding sex is quite possible without penetration. Depending on culture and what religious taboos you were raised with, there are many ways to skin a cat. Religion and its doctrines have grossly perverted mans natural sexuality. So its not the of avoiding of penetrative sex (that can lead to pregnancy) that may be seen as abnormal, rather the total lack of interest in sex which could and should be seen as abnormal.
maybe this woman doesnt find a mans head between her legs or a c**k in her mouth pleasurable either.
when you are saying abnormal here do you mean pathological/ "something wrong"?
or do you mean not average?
sorry, but sex just isnt always like you see in the movies. your confines are narrow also, just in a different way.Your confines are so narrow here water, you leave no room for the bigger picture of ‘sex”. Sex is an expression of love, a pleasure, and an art.
have you triied to understand the reasons for the lack of interest in sex in this particualr situation that is presented. it doesnt appear you have, it seems you have your own beliefs on the subject already and you have tried to justify them rather than question them. then impose them on someone that doesnt beleive them either. but i dont know i might be wrong.Procreation is but one possible outcome. I can quite understand that if a woman has had bad experiences involving pregnancies and abortion, that she may well have an absolute and justifiable dislike for sex. Any decent man that cared for his partner thought, would try to understand the underlying reasons for the lack of desire for sex. Alas, we have some dirty dogs out there
water am i wrong? is stretch being a disrespectful tosser?
NOTE TO EVERYONE POSTING HERE:
By "sex", in my argument is meant *vaginal intercourse*, not other forms of sexual activities.
okay, so masturabtion which involves penetration is that not enjoyable either? i'm not sure if i am being serious anymore.
This thread is about the simple penis-to-vagina intercourse, the kind that can lead to pregnancy.
So keep to that perspective, please.
What exactly are you getting at here? If you can't enjoy sex because you are worried about possibly conceiving, even though you use contraceptives, then you have a type of fear or phobia, unless there is something else at work here. Be more specific in what you need help with. Explain a little more. So far, I find it difficult to understand exactly what the problem is. Id the problem a little more. :?
And it is exactly your (and many other people's) not understanding what the problem is that is so telling.
Go back reading my previous posts here.
Also, just answer the question: Why do you think it is a phobia if a woman is afraid of conceiving despite using contraceptives?
I think it is just that the man or woman who uses those terms are unsettled by not being able to help you be happy and enjoy the sex. They may fear that something is wrong with them, they get hurt, and thus they want to hurt you back. Understand that most anger and hurtful things do stem from some type of fear or insecurity, in my opinion.
Again, I think, this attitude stems from our own ability to hurt others when we feel hurt or surprised. I think this quote of yours is more to the point of your fears. Being judged for being, in your eyes, responsible and knowledgeable of the risks. Feeling like something may be wrong with you. Understand that we all have fears and when some of us are afraid we want to lash out or hurt someone or something in order to cover our own embarrasment for being afraid, or our own anger at being rejected.It seems that if a woman is not willing to accept the risks of a possible abortion or unwanted child, this is abnormal, pathologic.
Eventually, thus, a woman who is not willing to have an abortion or an unwanted child, is deemed abnormal, pathologic.
In my opinion, it is perfectly okay to not have sex because you are trying to be responsible. This is not something you should feel ashamed of or be made to feel ashamed of, if that is the case. :wink:
Well, is that more along the lines of what you want to hear?
Please, this is not a personal argument.
It is a simple matter, pertaining to everyday life, for which a clear and objective argument can be developed.
Water,
Why does there have to be any justification for it? It's just a term. It's a term that men (sometimes women) apply to women when they are sexually frustrated by not being allowed to have sex with them or allowed to have sex with a 'dead fish'. That's the only time that a man can know that a woman doesn't enjoy sex. Through either being denied (in which case he may be mistaken that she doesn't like sex. She may just not like it with him.) or because sex is like sex with a corpse (in which case, again, it might very well be a problem with him rather than the general attitude of the woman.) So, in these instances, not only is he sexually frustrated, but he's feeling somewhat attacked by her. He's unsure whether she really dislikes sex or if she dislikes him.I am interested in what the justification is for calling those women who do not enjoy sex for pleasure, "frigid" or "having a phobia about sex".
It seems that if a woman is not willing to accept the risks of a possible abortion or unwanted child, this is abnormal, pathologic.
Sex is a social act in our species. Monogamous relationships are somewhat artificial and our bodies still lead us into socially sexual situations. Not as much as the horny chimpanzee, but more than the gorilla as evidenced by the size of our testicle which are at a midpoint between the two. So, when denied sex from one who we think likes us, then it makes us wonder whether they like us at all and it puts us on unsure ground.
People attack when on unsure ground. Hence frigid and ice queen and whatnot.
Now. There is another method of finding out that a woman doesn't enjoy sex. Talking to her and having her divulge the information. In this case, there is no feeling of attack or resentment. In this case, you can know that she's being honest and you can actually try to talk to her about it openly and honestly. If she wants to enjoy sex but can't, then perhaps you can even help her to open up to the act.
Now. Let's seperate a couple of issues here before we go any farther.
There is a difference between not enjoying sex and not having sex for fear of pregnancy. It's true that constant worry about pregnancy can likely lead to a state of mind which is not conducive to enjoyment, but that's not to say that the woman doesn't enjoy sex.
There are a couple of scenarios here. The woman is so worried and nervous that she basically dries up and can't enjoy the act. Or she does enjoy sex and wants to have sex but doesn't because she is fearful of pregnancy.
I think overworrying is a problem. The first woman is likely not only worrying about sex. She probably worries about everything all the time. I imagine more aspects of her life are cut short than just sex because of her fears. The second woman is more practical. And even though she might consider 'loosening up' every now and again, taking a chance on occasion, at least she's not psychologically damaging herself with her worries. She's making conscious decisions.
Every human seperates mind from body. We're not all Zen Masters. And even Zen Masters are somewhat bullshit artists.This is so only for those who separate the mind from the body.
Say cock. Cock and pussy. Fucking.This thread is about the simple penis-to-vagina intercourse, the kind that can lead to pregnancy.
So keep to that perspective, please.
It all depends on how much she is afraid of conceiving. It can be a phobia if carried far enough. You have to take risks, Water.Also, just answer the question: Why do you think it is a phobia if a woman is afraid of conceiving despite using contraceptives?
Ellion,
A completely different topic, yes. But what if he was being disrespectful? Is there a reason why Water must be shown respect by all comers?water am i wrong? is stretch being a disrespectful tosser?
And, what is more respectful? Couching your words so as to be 'respectful' or being honest?
Muahhahahahahhaahahahahaaahahaha!!!sorry, but sex just isnt always like you see in the movies. your confines are narrow also, just in a different way.
Ha!
Damn. That was funny.
You're right of course, but what a funny way to say it. The movies, where our sexual lessons originate...
Heh.
Anyway. Yeah. Sex isn't always 'an expression of love, a pleasure, and an art.' In fact, when sex becomes 'art' then that means you've got serious fucking problems. But, sometimes sex can be an expression of neutrality, or friendship, or hatred, or disgust, it can be degrading, painful, humiliating. Sometimes you're with someone and you play it like an angel. All lovey dovey and sweet music and blah. And sometimes its like two filthy beasts rutting. Dirty and sleazy. Slimey and gross. Holes being penetrated that were never meant to be. And all's fair in love and war.
Still. The movies... Funny.
Anyway. I think that sex gets an all-around treatment in the movies. Just depends on what movies you watch.
Yeah. You cram your hands down her pants and give her a moistness check. I termed this a 'curious george' in some thread back at Sci. You then look at your hand and voila...okay! so you can tell by looking at someone if they do or dont enjoy sex?
how?
can you diagonse what is 'wrong' with them just by looking too?
What do you think about my thoughts on the matter?
Exactly!
Good point!Now. There is another method of finding out that a woman doesn't enjoy sex. Talking to her and having her divulge the information. In this case, there is no feeling of attack or resentment. In this case, you can know that she's being honest and you can actually try to talk to her about it openly and honestly. If she wants to enjoy sex but can't, then perhaps you can even help her to open up to the act.
Again, very good points!Now. Let's seperate a couple of issues here before we go any farther.
There is a difference between not enjoying sex and not having sex for fear of pregnancy. It's true that constant worry about pregnancy can likely lead to a state of mind which is not conducive to enjoyment, but that's not to say that the woman doesn't enjoy sex.
There are a couple of scenarios here. The woman is so worried and nervous that she basically dries up and can't enjoy the act. Or she does enjoy sex and wants to have sex but doesn't because she is fearful of pregnancy.
I think overworrying is a problem. The first woman is likely not only worrying about sex. She probably worries about everything all the time. I imagine more aspects of her life are cut short than just sex because of her fears. The second woman is more practical. And even though she might consider 'loosening up' every now and again, taking a chance on occasion, at least she's not psychologically damaging herself with her worries. She's making conscious decisions.
Invert, can I suck your cock please?Say cock. Cock and pussy. Fucking.
**nearly throws up at the thought of sucking cock**
Not my quotes invert. Ellion's. And to think I wanted to suck your cock!!Cottontop,
A completely different topic, yes. But what if he was being disrespectful? Is there a reason why Water must be shown respect by all comers?water am i wrong? is stretch being a disrespectful tosser?
And, what is more respectful? Couching your words so as to be 'respectful' or being honest?
Muahhahahahahhaahahahahaaahahaha!!!sorry, but sex just isnt always like you see in the movies. your confines are narrow also, just in a different way.
Ha!
Damn. That was funny.
You're right of course, but what a funny way to say it. The movies, where our sexual lessons originate...
Heh.
Anyway. Yeah. Sex isn't always 'an expression of love, a pleasure, and an art.' In fact, when sex becomes 'art' then that means you've got serious fucking problems. But, sometimes sex can be an expression of neutrality, or friendship, or hatred, or disgust, it can be degrading, painful, humiliating. Sometimes you're with someone and you play it like an angel. All lovey dovey and sweet music and blah. And sometimes its like two filthy beasts rutting. Dirty and sleazy. Slimey and gross. Holes being penetrated that were never meant to be. And all's fair in love and war.
Still. The movies... Funny.
Anyway. I think that sex gets an all-around treatment in the movies. Just depends on what movies you watch.
Yeah. You cram your hands down her pants and give her a moistness check. I termed this a 'curious george' in some thread back at Sci. You then look at your hand and voila...okay! so you can tell by looking at someone if they do or dont enjoy sex?
how?
can you diagonse what is 'wrong' with them just by looking too?
Doh!Not my quotes invert. Ellion's. And to think I wanted to suck your cock!!
Sorry about that.
And hands off the cock.
I'm gonna pinch it off!!!You've still got one of Ellion's quotes attributed to me. Having an off afternoon?
EDIT: Thanks, you fixed it before I finished posting this one.
Invert you address cottontop but it was actually my posts, nevermind.
i wasnt asking stretch to be respectful and it is not my position to ask him to be. i was checking with water if she sensed the same disrespect as i did. i am sure water can stick up for herself anyway if someone wants to dsirespect her good luck to them may they get what they deserve.A completely different topic, yes. But what if he was being disrespectful? Is there a reason why Water must be shown respect by all comers?
hey you think the movie pun was funny. see what you left me>
yes, yes!Say cock. Cock and pussy. Fucking.
oh yes!you've got serious fucking problems
i love it yes!like two filthy beasts rutting. Dirty and sleazy. Slimey and gross. Holes being penetrated that were never meant to be
awwh shit, thats it, thats it where the tissues that was a soppy one.You cram your hands down her pants and give her a moistness check. I termed this a 'curious george' in some thread back at Sci. You then look at your hand and voila...
Yeah.awwh shit, thats it, thats it where the tissues that was a soppy one.
But mine were supposed to be funny.
Well, you got me there. I guess it might only be considered a phobia if the person with the problem thinks it is and/or if it affects her life in such a manner that it is disruptive or detrimental to her (according to her or others that care about her.)
That's why I wanted you to clarify your position. Misunderstandings are easy when the problem is not clearly identified. I can live with misunderstandings though.
those who have eyes to see the Stars will ne'er dry their tears of joy.Yeah.
But mine were supposed to be funny.
words themselves are mockery of life.
Yorda, is that you?
shall we just hijack water s thread and spend some time getiing confused about who we really are, it could be more fun than thinking about porn.
Nah, I'm confused enough already. We could start a thread (in the trash can probably) about who we know to be someone else though. Start it Ellion!! GO!! GO!! GO!!shall we just hijack water s thread and spend some time getiing confused about who we really are, it could be more fun than thinking about porn.
Water
Facts:
~ Women are expected to enjoy sex, even if it is not for reproduction.
Fucking aye I expect her to enjoy it.
I won't touch someone without a certain assurance - without an almost connotative "Ooooooh baby". hah.
Well, reaching the blooey state (with the help of excessive usage of substances) of passing out as you suck on the tittie like an infant does not impose the theorem..
But that's just funny, for you and for the milady.
It's like playing tekken with a friend who does not care about the thrill.
If your opponent is not pissed off when KO'd, It's a lost cause.
Though, I won’t cast the friend out for that. For it is merely a past time.
An expression of love my ass. The excessive meanings which are laid upon the act could be attached to any other feature of interaction.
And they are.
The artificial meanings present in the "love you's" and other subtle hints of affection destroy the general consciousness that thrive people to question the foundations of these constantly reinforced aspects.
It’s not a face value.
You can’t generalize women or speak solely from a single woman’s perspective. When you say women are expected to enjoy sex, you speak for the preference group. How would you know what is expected from you? Do you expect it from yourself?
If I don’t expect you to like it, I won’t touch you.
Water seems perplexed and questions one of the most basic motives which have driven sex to be what it is now: a sport.
It’s not about reproducing anymore; hence the enjoyment is to be...
expected.
This is like me phoning a beer brewery going “do you fuckers expect me to enjoy this commitment which leads to all kinds of fucked up situations!?”.
They would say: Up to you, drink water, dipshit.
I think your vagina is broken.
I hear invert is handy with pliers. Though, I wouldn’t trust him, I generally don’t trust anyone who does not drink.
Sexual education in school, official medicine, the media, they all promote the concept of sex for pleasure (and they mean penis-to-vagina intercourse). And along with it, they are saying
"If you don't have sex, you are not normal."
This is how the sexual conditioning in western societies takes place.
Some people say "Sexual health is the domain of those willing to take the needed risks", which includes that a woman, in order to be "sexually healthy", must be willing to have abortions.
(I wish I had the Sciforums data base to link to!)
I want to find out the basis of such a position, and what it entails -- and how consistent it is.
* * *
Ask the official medicine, ask Freud. Ask Cosmopolitan, Playboy, Sex and the city, Men's Health. Ask the good middle-class man.
See Vera Drake and then tell me about the sexual demands of men.
* * *
Go to an abortion clinic, also, check out abortion statistics. Do you believe that those women enjoy sex?
I wish SkinWalker, invert_nexus, cosmictraveler, and Freud would take position to this!* Fulfilling and rewarding sex is quite possible without penetration.
I say they are the majority.Any decent man that cared for his partner thought, would try to understand the underlying reasons for the lack of desire for sex.
Alas, we have some dirty dogs out there.
Freud and all his followers would call you and any "decent man" to be slimy feely twats.
* * *
The problem with averages and statistics is this: What is statistically the majority, is deemed as normal, and what is normal is desirable, and also pursued.
If a statistics shows that vaginal intercourse is the dominant form of sexual activities, then this will be promulgated as normal and set as a standard, and everything not complying to this standard will be deemed abnormal.
No worries.water am i wrong? is stretch being a disrespectful tosser?
* * *
I think this is hardly so. Frigidity is a term defined in psychology and medicine. It is deemed an aberration, an abnormality.
* * *
It is not "just a term". Look it up in psychology and medical books.
"Frigidity" is deemed to be an abnormality; and if it is deemed an abnormality, this means there is a standard of normality to which those cases, now termed "frigidity", have been measured against.
I'd love to hear what Freud and his followers would say to that.It's a term that men (sometimes women) apply to women when they are sexually frustrated by not being allowed to have sex with them or allowed to have sex with a 'dead fish'. That's the only time that a man can know that a woman doesn't enjoy sex. Through either being denied (in which case he may be mistaken that she doesn't like sex. She may just not like it with him.) or because sex is like sex with a corpse (in which case, again, it might very well be a problem with him rather than the general attitude of the woman.) So, in these instances, not only is he sexually frustrated, but he's feeling somewhat attacked by her. He's unsure whether she really dislikes sex or if she dislikes him.
Also, what SkinWalker thinks.
Ih eh heh.Every human seperates mind from body. We're not all Zen Masters. And even Zen Masters are somewhat bullshit artists.
Please, keep this civil.Say cock. Cock and pussy. Fucking.
Why?You have to take risks, Water.
And what risks?
* * *
Exactly. Communication and any further consideration stops when formulas are used.
All those phrases and conventional signs are there to box and pigeon-hole a real-life situation. Thus, they make a dead object of it.
Why so, what is the motivation to do so?
Science generalizes very much.You can’t generalize women or speak solely from a single woman’s perspective.
The popular rule to interpret science is: What is the majority is normal, what is normal is desirable, everything else is not.
The sexual education does give the impression that sex must be enjoyed, or ther eis something wrong with you.When you say women are expected to enjoy sex, you speak for the preference group. How would you know what is expected from you? Do you expect it from yourself?
Exactly.Water seems perplexed and questions one of the most basic motives which have driven sex to be what it is now: a sport.
It’s not about reproducing anymore; hence the enjoyment is to be...
expected.
In consumer societies, the principle for doing things is:
YOU MUST DO IT BECAUSE YOU CAN DO IT.
YOU MUST DO IT AND YOU MUST ENJOY IT.
I am questioning how much sense this makes, and whether people actually do enjoy things when done this way.
8)
Quote w:
"Go to an abortion clinic, also, check out abortion statistics. Do you believe that those women enjoy sex?"
* In a nutshell? Probably yes. Did they get pregnant via wind pollination?
like i said those who will justify distorted beliefs will have distorted justifications.
i imagine this will just be someone elses expression of their sexual expereinces. it doesnt matter to me what any of the above could tell me about the sexual demands of men, i am not men, i am me, i can tell you about the sexual demands of me, but the sexual demands of men i do no not know. i do not need to know, needing to know such is to buy into the type insecurity and mistrust of my feelings and awareness of my own demands, that is sold by the above distorted belief makers.See Vera Drake and then tell me about the sexual demands of men.
a different subject but one which illustrates a similar theme.
i dont eat meat. the response i get from people is something along the lines of>.
*shock* why? why do you not eat meat?
well its dead a dead animal, flesh and blood and i find it revolting.
but its food, we are meant to eat it, it is good for makes us strong feeds the brain!
no, its a dead animal, it makes me sick.
thats not nromal!
no, its not normal, but i am very happy not being normal.
your weird!
yes, i am!
so what kind of food do you eat?
well i really like raw carrots, bananas, fresh food!
eeargggh! raw carrots? how could you? no, your sick man, fucking sick!
thats distorted beliefs and social conditioning, a socially acceptable ignorance to personal health, welfare, needs and desires.
Since when did all these sources become your god? Freud? You've got to be kidding me. Cosmoshite? Who gives a shit what they say? Don't read that crap, because that is what it is, CRAP!! Playboy? Okay, whatever. Sex and the City? Fine, i've only watched it a time or two, but I thought it was boring mostly. Men's Health? Don't need it or want it. I know how to take care of my health based on what my mommy and daddy taught me. Nothing really knew in the health industry except new marketing geared mostly towards the rape of the Western (and also increasingly the Eastern) man and woman's pocketbook. Ask several good middle class men, and you'll get several different answers, as you can see here in this thread itself. Fuck Vera Drake.
Ask the official medicine, ask Freud. Ask Cosmopolitan, Playboy, Sex and the city, Men's Health. Ask the good middle-class man.
See Vera Drake and then tell me about the sexual demands of men.
* * *
Sure. Some probably do and some may not. So what? Sex is different for everyone. As you age, so do your opinions about sex. They are constantly changing, based on what you get out of it and what it takes from you to do it. If you get tired of abortions, you may get tired of sex or you may learn to be more careful, or you may not. It depends on the person.Go to an abortion clinic, also, check out abortion statistics. Do you believe that those women enjoy sex?
Why? What does it matter to you what faceless members on a forum think about sex. I think if you pay attention and are not so quick to judge you will notice that invert_nexus has a very healthy outlook regarding sex, as opposed to what some magazine or quack "doctor" have to say about the matter.I wish SkinWalker, invert_nexus, cosmictraveler, and Freud would take position to this!* Fulfilling and rewarding sex is quite possible without penetration.
I say you are stereotyping again. Maybe the men you have known are dirty dogs, but I would hazard a guess that you haven't met or known most of the men in the world. Again, FUCK FREUD!!!! He's one moron I could forget in a heartbeat if people would stop giving him any credit whatsoever.I say they are the majority.Any decent man that cared for his partner thought, would try to understand the underlying reasons for the lack of desire for sex.
Alas, we have some dirty dogs out there.
Freud and all his followers would call you and any "decent man" to be slimy feely twats.
* * *
Say this to yourself water: "Fuck men that hurt me!" Believe it. Live it. They are the abnormal ones. "They may think they make the rules, but when it comes to me they better watch out."The problem with averages and statistics is this: What is statistically the majority, is deemed as normal, and what is normal is desirable, and also pursued.
If a statistics shows that vaginal intercourse is the dominant form of sexual activities, then this will be promulgated as normal and set as a standard, and everything not complying to this standard will be deemed abnormal.
* * *
So is depression. Doesn't mean that the term depression is the same for everyone. For me, the causes of my depression may not be the same as they are for someone else. Same with frigidity. It doesn't matter what someone else labels you. It matters what you label yourself, and whether or not you can live with yourself. Again, if someone makes you feel bad about yourself, forget about them. I know you can do this.I think this is hardly so. Frigidity is a term defined in psychology and medicine. It is deemed an aberration, an abnormality.
* * *
Simple: To Survive or To Hurt or To Dominate, but mostly to cope.Exactly. Communication and any further consideration stops when formulas are used.
All those phrases and conventional signs are there to box and pigeon-hole a real-life situation. Thus, they make a dead object of it.
Why so, what is the motivation to do so?
To each, his/her own I say.Science generalizes very much.You can’t generalize women or speak solely from a single woman’s perspective.
The popular rule to interpret science is: What is the majority is normal, what is normal is desirable, everything else is not.
Good question. What is YOUR answer?When you say women are expected to enjoy sex, you speak for the preference group. How would you know what is expected from you? Do you expect it from yourself?
I, again, say fuck them all. Hee Hee. That feels good.The sexual education does give the impression that sex must be enjoyed, or ther eis something wrong with you.
This is where you have to stand up for what is right for you. What works for you. You have to step outside of the main-stream if it wrongs you. This is where you use your brain and decide what is right for you, for now, recognizing that you are free to change your opinions and attitudes at any time. Feel free to make mistakes too. You are only human after all.Exactly.
In consumer societies, the principle for doing things is:
YOU MUST DO IT BECAUSE YOU CAN DO IT.
YOU MUST DO IT AND YOU MUST ENJOY IT.
I am questioning how much sense this makes, and whether people actually do enjoy things when done this way.
I would love to hear what such a woman thinks -- whether it was worth it.
Whether the pleasure of sex was worth the abortion.
The discussion on abortion goes on and on: arguments focus mostly either on
the "woman's right to her body" or on whether the fetus is a human being or
not.
The abortion discussion is being extremely ineffective, considering it goes
on for so long.
Which makes me think that it is being approached from the wrong perspective:
It focuses on a possible outcome of sex, but not on the motivation for sex.
As if pregnancy and sex wouldn't really have something to do with one
another.
Which brings me to the motivation for sex. Procreation and pleasure, or
solely pleasure.
If solely for pleasure, what does it take to compensate for the risks?
And why compensate for those risks, and why find those compensations
acceptable?
The usual compensation seems to be that the risks of abortion or unwanted
pregnancy are somehow outweighed by the pleasure of the act itself, or by
the "strenghtening of emotional bonds between partners".
Personally, I find such compensations to be grossly disproportional.
Taking great risks only shows the overall impotence of the risktaker, who
apparently believes that what he wants can be achieved *only* by taking
those risks.
Or maybe, he thinks that it is only the risk itself that makes something
count, that it is the risk that makes something worthy.
How come abortion is an acceptable risk?
how come abortion is favourable to giving birth?
i am not making a judgement about your opinion, but i am wondering why you feel so so strongly about not terminating pregnancy but dont give much consideration to the other possible risk of giving birth.
which i think is the usual option taken.
Because we live in a "me, me, me" society for the most part. One that I hate but have felt powerless to change. Abortion, considering its modern prevalence, acceptance and ease, is really a new thing on such a wide scale. I think you realize this. We, as a western society, have a lot of untalked about and, for some, unknown problems. I think our "powerful" are corrupt and rotten. I don't disagree with the need for abortions, or the need of a woman to have the right to have one, but overall, if people are more open to sex today, and see it as something less taboo to do or talk about than in the past, I think this is a good thing. I abhor christian thinking regarding sex. Christianity (and other religions), in my experience, causes many more harmful insecurities, and thus more fear, more jealousy, more anger, more self-doubt, and more hate than life would without the religion.
Why is abortion an acceptable risk for some?
Because some people are confused, lost, angry, selfish, depressed, have lost most hope, don't like society, want to rebel. The answers to this question are innumerable. What is important is either finding a balance between sex and abstinence that works for you, that you can live with, or deciding to give it up altogether until you find the right man and want to have a kid or two. You make the only decision that matters.
Texan fool
All that beef and gasoline must have corroded your brain.Good question. What is YOUR answer?When you say women are expected to enjoy sex, you speak for the preference group. How would you know what is expected from you? Do you expect it from yourself?
Did you not see my take? Perhaps you should stick to finishing sentences.
To expect something from someone derives from an unknown position for there is no truly concrete information present in the state where one expects something from someone. This is not an axiom between the expector and the expectee, bleh.
One just hopes for a match.
Why the fuck would I answer my own query?
8)
Quote Cottontop3000:
" Because some people are confused, lost, angry, selfish, depressed, have lost most hope, don't like society, want to rebel. The answers to this question are innumerable. What is important is either finding a balance between sex and abstinence that works for you, that you can live with, or deciding to give it up altogether until you find the right man and want to have a kid or two. You make the only decision that matters."
* Well said brother. Before you are wise or mature enough to define "love" and "relationship", these things happen. Looking for love and acceptance between the thighs is common. Except, if you are naive, it leads to potential pregnancy. It is rather sad.
Quote w:
"I would love to hear what such a woman thinks -- whether it was worth it.
Whether the pleasure of sex was worth the abortion."
* Yeah, a moments pleasure, then a lifetime of regret. In retrospect regrettable, but why not consider the consequences in more detail beforehand? Is intellectual prowess a guarantee against falling pregnant by accident? It is always going to take two to tango. And its always going to be a choice. (apart from rape, etc)
Quote ellion:
"so then, would you propose that she could be fixed and made to enjoy sex"
* Yep.
Quote ellion:
"it would be interseting to hear your views on the 'normality' of homo/bisexuality. are they also deviant from the physiology that nature has provided?"
* Nope.
Quote ellion:
"and once we have tried to understand them then we can put them in the box titled "something wrong with you?"
* Yep.
Quote ellion:
" when you are saying abnormal here do you mean pathological/ "something wrong"?
or do you mean not average?"
* Not average.
Quote ellion:
" sorry, but sex just isnt always like you see in the movies. your confines are narrow also, just in a different way."
* I`m as open as a gaper.
Quote ellion:
"have you triied to understand the reasons for the lack of interest in sex in this particualr situation that is presented. it doesnt appear you have, it seems you have your own beliefs on the subject already and you have tried to justify them rather than question them. then impose them on someone that doesnt beleive them either. but i dont know i might be wrong."
* Take your medication.
You'd probably think so.All that beef and gasoline must have corroded your brain.
You, my friend, are a lazy one.Did you not see my take? Perhaps you should stick to finishing sentences.
Why don't you put that into English? Too difficult for that Perfect brain of yours? What the fuck is your point?To expect something from someone derives from an unknown position for there is no truly concrete information present in the state where one expects something from someone. This is not an axiom between the expector and the expectee, bleh.
Bleh yourself.One just hopes for a match.
Why the fuck would you answer your own query?Why the fuck would I answer my own query?
How could she be "fixed" and "made to enjoy sex"?
Is "not average" something you find detrimental, undesirable?* Not average." when you are saying abnormal here do you mean pathological/ "something wrong"? or do you mean not average?"
Please, keep this civil.* Take your medication.
On what basis do you call them "distorted"?
Yes, I know this well. I also get it for not drinking coffee, alcohol and not smoking. For not having my hair died, for not wearing miniskirts and high heels, for not wearing make-up ... I am severely unliked!a different subject but one which illustrates a similar theme.
i dont eat meat. the response i get from people is something along the lines of>.
*shock* why? why do you not eat meat?
well its dead a dead animal, flesh and blood and i find it revolting.
but its food, we are meant to eat it, it is good for makes us strong feeds the brain!
no, its a dead animal, it makes me sick.
thats not nromal!
no, its not normal, but i am very happy not being normal.
your weird!
yes, i am!
so what kind of food do you eat?
well i really like raw carrots, bananas, fresh food!
eeargggh! raw carrots? how could you? no, your sick man, fucking sick!
EXACTLY.thats distorted beliefs and social conditioning, a socially acceptable ignorance to personal health, welfare, needs and desires.
What interests me: How come this ignorance is so socially acceptable, even demanded as a standard of "normality"?
* * *
Thank you much for straightening the path right to the core of my argument!!
In a world where people deny God, they assign other things to be their gods, and then they serve them and obey them with the same fervence as they would serve and obey God.
Let me ask you this: Would you marry a woman who would not have sex with you, other than for procreation?Sure. Some probably do and some may not. So what? Sex is different for everyone. As you age, so do your opinions about sex. They are constantly changing, based on what you get out of it and what it takes from you to do it. If you get tired of abortions, you may get tired of sex or you may learn to be more careful, or you may not. It depends on the person.
I merely want to see their argument. I don't really care who they are, I needn't know that.Why? What does it matter to you what faceless members on a forum think about sex.
A person's mind is a system of beliefs, that are interconnected in a certain way. I'm interested in seeing those interconnections.
As far as I can tell, invert_nexus wants a woman who will have sex with him, but will not have children. That is, invert_nexus wants a woman who is willing to have abortions. That is, invert_nexus is a man whose condition for his affection is that the woman be willing to have abortions.I think if you pay attention and are not so quick to judge you will notice that invert_nexus has a very healthy outlook regarding sex, as opposed to what some magazine or quack "doctor" have to say about the matter.
I surely haven't known most of the men in the world. But all I have known, wanted only that one thing of me, and those that haven't, haven't liked me.I say you are stereotyping again. Maybe the men you have known are dirty dogs, but I would hazard a guess that you haven't met or known most of the men in the world.
All well. But children are being fed those theories in school. This is where the problem becomes objective and serious.Again, FUCK FREUD!!!! He's one moron I could forget in a heartbeat if people would stop giving him any credit whatsoever.
I think sexual education in schools has a very detrimental effect on esp. the mental health of youth -- sexual education basically teaches people to seek happiness and emotional attachment in sex first.
Just like the drug education completely misses its point: It educates future drug users. It does not bring people away from drugs -- what it is actually supposed to do! --, but it teaches them how to use them relatively safely.
Sexual education tends to take the motivations for sex for granted, and I think this is what is so wrong with it.
If only. Fortunately, those psychological evaluations are not obligatory anymore, but as a part of the regular medical checkup a college student must do here, a psychological test was obligatory too. And if you didn't pass it well enough, the results went into your medical record. A future employer has access to that medical record, and could refuse you on the basis of you not having passed a certain psychological test devised by a certain psychology school.So is depression. Doesn't mean that the term depression is the same for everyone. For me, the causes of my depression may not be the same as they are for someone else. Same with frigidity. It doesn't matter what someone else labels you. It matters what you label yourself, and whether or not you can live with yourself.
Meaning, to be elligible for work, you have to be fitting someone's idea of "average".
(I learned my lesson, and on the next test, answered the way a "nice normal girl" would, and passed it well.)
Is this what you would say to the youth?This is where you have to stand up for what is right for you. What works for you. You have to step outside of the main-stream if it wrongs you. This is where you use your brain and decide what is right for you, for now, recognizing that you are free to change your opinions and attitudes at any time. Feel free to make mistakes too. You are only human after all.
* * *
Giving birth is hardly just an "option". Giving birth to a child and keeping it means a radical change to the woman's life.
Abortion or birth are just the end outcomes. I am wondering about the motivations for sex.
* * *
I don't think so. I people indeed serve and obey God, then there is no fear, jealousy, anger, self-doubt or hate.
What causes fear, jealousy, anger, self-doubt or hate is a particular, selfish practice of a religion, mostly centred on the sexual needs of men.
Christianity has been mainly practiced as a strict patriarchate, which I think is a great abuse of what the Bible says. Men were given so much power in order to protect women, but they have used that power in order to pursue their own selfish sexual interests.
* * *
I think CT was addressing that question to me.
And here's the vile trick: If person B isn't person A's match, then A puts this against B.To expect something from someone derives from an unknown position for there is no truly concrete information present in the state where one expects something from someone. This is not an axiom between the expector and the expectee, bleh.
One just hopes for a match.
* * *
One, conception or non-conception is not a matter of decision. It is beyond human power to decide about that; it can be somewhat affected though. So your suggestion of naivety is not in place.
Two, would you want an intimate and exclusive relationship with a woman, maybe even marriage, if she would not have sex with you, except for conceiving desired children?
I'm not so sure about that. I know women and men who find abortion to be a normal thing. Like having a wart removed.* Yeah, a moments pleasure, then a lifetime of regret.
"Because sex is a necessity, silly! Every normal person is doing it! If you don't have sex, you are not normal! You have to be normal!"In retrospect regrettable, but why not consider the consequences in more detail beforehand?
Anyway, my point is -- on what basis do you refute the usual social conditioning?
Not here. You are well liked here, Water.
Several reasons. One of them you and I have already talked about, though I don't think you agree with me: as humans, we have bought into or invested in certain assumptions and ideas (religion, for example. capitalism, for another) that have their decent sides and their bad sides. However, for fear of proving the whole system wrong, the whole mindset associated with these ideas and assumptions, we are afraid to even admit to ourselves that their is anything wrong with them. We have taken a few wrong turns in our thinking (for, again, numerous reasons) and we are too proud to admit that we did. It is easier to ignore the problems than to change them.What interests me: How come this ignorance is so socially acceptable, even demanded as a standard of "normality"?
Another reason is that those with power and money propagate this ignorance because it makes it easier for them to stay in power. Someone else said it somewhere else recently: divide and conquer. America, for instance, is very divided right now (between political parties, theists/atheists, men/women, etc.) and that is wonderful for both political parties and all the rich, powerful, corrupt politicians on both sides of the aisle, not to mention the corporations who help influence public opinion, fund both parties and generally act as one of the major players in the brainwashing of America.
Thank you for finally letting me in on what you wanted to get at. Good point, by the way. I need to think more about this.Thank you much for straightening the path right to the core of my argument!!
In a world where people deny God, they assign other things to be their gods, and then they serve them and obey them with the same fervence as they would serve and obey God.
To be honest, yes. Sex is not as important to me nowadays as other things. Though I'm not sure I really like the part about having kids. Right now, I don't want kids. That might change someday though.Let me ask you this: Would you marry a woman who would not have sex with you, other than for procreation?
I know you are. At least you are trying to be nice. You make me feel guilty. Sorry.I merely want to see their argument. I don't really care who they are, I needn't know that.
A person's mind is a system of beliefs, that are interconnected in a certain way. I'm interested in seeing those interconnections.
Sure about that?I surely haven't known most of the men in the world. But all I have known, wanted only that one thing of me, and those that haven't, haven't liked me.
I don't know anything about what is being taught in school these days. But it wouldn't surprise me, for the above-mentioned reasons.All well. But children are being fed those theories in school. This is where the problem becomes objective and serious.
Me too. I almost forgot about those tests, but yes I was a natural at telling others what they wanted to hear.If only. Fortunately, those psychological evaluations are not obligatory anymore, but as a part of the regular medical checkup a college student must do here, a psychological test was obligatory too. And if you didn't pass it well enough, the results went into your medical record. A future employer has access to that medical record, and could refuse you on the basis of you not having passed a certain psychological test devised by a certain psychology school.
Meaning, to be elligible for work, you have to be fitting someone's idea of "average".
(I learned my lesson, and on the next test, answered the way a "nice normal girl" would, and passed it well.)
If I had a kid, this would be part of it. I haven't really spent a lot of time worrying about it though, because I think it would be irresponsible of me to bring a child into this world.Is this what you would say to the youth?This is where you have to stand up for what is right for you. What works for you. You have to step outside of the main-stream if it wrongs you. This is where you use your brain and decide what is right for you, for now, recognizing that you are free to change your opinions and attitudes at any time. Feel free to make mistakes too. You are only human after all.
This is where I think you are misguided. "If people indeed serve and obey God," then they must indeed be near perfect. Humans are nowhere near perfect, nor should they be taught that they can or should be. This is exactly what leads young kids into failure and self-doubt and self-hate. Religions set children up for failure and disillusionment. Thus, in my opinion, so does God. I can't separate God from his "children," nor will I try anymore, at least not right now.I don't think so. I people indeed serve and obey God, then there is no fear, jealousy, anger, self-doubt or hate.
What causes fear, jealousy, anger, self-doubt or hate is a particular, selfish practice of a religion, mostly centred on the sexual needs of men.
Yes, but again you forget that we are human, not perfect Gods. People expect too much from other people, while at the same time not giving them enough credit for what they are capable of suffering and overcoming. We are at once too critical and expect too much. I wish we could find some good middle ground. Some have. Some never will.Christianity has been mainly practiced as a strict patriarchate, which I think is a great abuse of what the Bible says. Men were given so much power in order to protect women, but they have used that power in order to pursue their own selfish sexual interests.
I sure was. I'm trying to be nice here.I think CT was addressing that question to me.
Not always. Sadly, this is true though for the most part in my experience. It applies to me, I know, at times.And here's the vile trick: If person B isn't person A's match, then A puts this against B.To expect something from someone derives from an unknown position for there is no truly concrete information present in the state where one expects something from someone. This is not an axiom between the expector and the expectee, bleh.
One just hopes for a match.
You so silly!"Because sex is a necessity, silly! Every normal person is doing it! If you don't have sex, you are not normal! You have to be normal!"
Experience.Anyway, my point is -- on what basis do you refute the usual social conditioning?
they have taken natural processes and made them something unatural by filtering them through their own complexes.
although freud had some insights into the unconcious mind and found valid means of access and interpretation, his own sexual neurosis became impressed upon all of his work, thus distroting the human psyche into a seething beast of repressed sexuality. this was probably true for freud, he may have been a seething beast of repressed sexuality but he is not The Huamn psyche.
the magazines you mention take such things as natural beauty and the need for attention, esteeem and self esteem. they make such things artificial, to be bought and sold to pamper the ego.
hardly an option but an option and the most often chosen.Giving birth is hardly just an "option". Giving birth to a child and keeping it means a radical change to the woman's life.
Abortion or birth are just the end outcomes. I am wondering about the motivations for sex.
the motivations are many what are you wondering about.
manipulation.
pleasure.
connivance.
lust.
procreation.
relaxation.
curiosity.
fustration.
self esteem.
revenge.
some possible motivations, what is it you are wondering?
Why is it every time I have a thread that contains "Perfect" and "Water" it starts to turn in to trash. Hmm. I won't point fingers in either direction, just an observation.
Yes I'm sure both of them will want to tell me to go F... myself. Boy wouldn't that make for an interesting life if I could
Uhh.
Wow.
Turning to trash?
Sheesh.
I wasn't going to post in here until I got my response to water finished, but... that just kinda blew me away.
Interesting.
I thought it was actually doing ok, myself.
Hmmm.
Why do you say that?
My problem is more with Perfect and his use of colorful metaphors then anything else. The very reason he ended up on Probation in the first place.
So Water, I apologize to make it appear you are the problem here. I think your defense of Perfect in the past simply brought back bad memories. In any event carry on.
(In)Sanity,
I do not think this thread is turning into trash at all. There are some very good things being said here!Why is it every time I have a thread that contains "Perfect" and "Water" it starts to turn in to trash. Hmm. I won't point fingers in either direction, just an observation.
Also, I have made an effort to keep it civil, I have asked people to refrain from using a certain vocabulary or attitude.
It is not fair of you to say is turning into trash.
I must say that this is an offensive thing of you to say.Yes I'm sure both of them will want to tell me to go F... myself.
You apparently do not know me well enough to know to whom, and in what situation, I would say certain things.
I expect you to apologize for saying I think the way of you as you suggested above.
I see, you posted just before me, as I was still composing my post.
Let's make something clear: I stood up for Perfect because he was banned while there were no site rules for bannings.
I stood up for justice.
I would have done so for any member who had been banned while there being no other site rules than that for spam and excessive profanity.
Fair enough, I won't make that unjustified connection again.Let's make something clear: I stood up for Perfect because he was banned while there were no site rules for bannings.
I stood up for justice.
I would have done so for any member who had been banned while there being no other site rules than that for spam and excessive profanity.
8) Quote w:
“How could she be "fixed" and "made to enjoy sex"?’
* Therapy, counselling and the patience of a compassionate partner. No guarantee of total success, but I have first hand experience of remarkable success. Unfortunately if the damage (abuse, etc) occurs at a very young age (between 2 and 9 years) it is much more difficult to achieve positive results. One cannot be “made to enjoy sex” unless one chooses to, or at least chooses to follow suggested means of improvement in the area.
Quote w:
“Is "not average" something you find detrimental, undesirable?”
* Personally, not in the least. Society at large would find this undesirable. And this particular “person” would develop major issues due to peer pressure etc.
Quote w:
“Please, keep this civil.”
* Hehe. You cut me up. 8)
Quote w:
“Yes, I know this well. I also get it for not drinking coffee, alcohol and not smoking. For not having my hair died, for not wearing miniskirts and high heels, for not wearing make-up ... I am severely unliked!”
* Society quite predictably, may judge you, but I commend you for staying true to yourself. Coffee, alcohol and smoking are totally overrated anyway. And you are VERY likeable. You are just a total individual, Id say people would generally be tentative around you.
But why?
If something is wrong, it is wrong, and if humans are reasonable beings, they will strive for what they think is right. No?
Yes.Thank you for finally letting me in on what you wanted to get at. Good point, by the way. I need to think more about this.Thank you much for straightening the path right to the core of my argument!!
In a world where people deny God, they assign other things to be their gods, and then they serve them and obey them with the same fervence as they would serve and obey God.
The problem is that the youth do not have a clear idea of who they are or what they want. Giving them such advice ("Do what works for you") will only confuse them.If I had a kid, this would be part of it.Is this what you would say to the youth?This is where you have to stand up for what is right for you. What works for you. You have to step outside of the main-stream if it wrongs you. This is where you use your brain and decide what is right for you, for now, recognizing that you are free to change your opinions and attitudes at any time. Feel free to make mistakes too. You are only human after all.
Not at all. The irony is, that it takes extremely little to serve and obey God!This is where I think you are misguided. "If people indeed serve and obey God," then they must indeed be near perfect.
They do, yes. But this is because those religions demand *human* standards of "perfection". Humanly perfect means something along ' beautiful, blond, strong, young, healthy, white, with a good, decent job, healthy'.Humans are nowhere near perfect, nor should they be taught that they can or should be. This is exactly what leads young kids into failure and self-doubt and self-hate. Religions set children up for failure and disillusionment.
I think it is nmot fair of you that you insist on not seprating God from His children. Anyone who considers himself to be a child of God, is not necessarily a child of God.Thus, in my opinion, so does God. I can't separate God from his "children," nor will I try anymore, at least not right now.
Yes, but all this is because we still depend on others to tell us who we are and what we are worth.Yes, but again you forget that we are human, not perfect Gods. People expect too much from other people, while at the same time not giving them enough credit for what they are capable of suffering and overcoming. We are at once too critical and expect too much. I wish we could find some good middle ground. Some have. Some never will.
When, on the other hand, we also believe it is only God who can tell us those things.
What about the youth? -- They do not have the experience to refute the social conditioning they are exposed to.Experience.Anyway, my point is -- on what basis do you refute the usual social conditioning?
So the argument is still open.
* * *
Sure, I intuitively agree with you. But. What is "natural"? Can you define it?
Why do you think this sells so well? There must be a reason for such a demand of such media.the magazines you mention take such things as natural beauty and the need for attention, esteeem and self esteem. they make such things artificial, to be bought and sold to pamper the ego.
Why? Pregnancy and birth are more certainly more risky than abortion. So why choose a greater risk?hardly an option but an option and the most often chosen.
I'm glad you provided this list!the motivations are many what are you wondering about.
manipulation.
pleasure.
connivance.
lust.
procreation.
relaxation.
curiosity.
fustration.
self esteem.
revenge.
some possible motivations, what is it you are wondering?
I am wondering:
1. Is sex the best way to act on these motivations, will sex give the most satisfying results to these motivations?
It certainly is as far as procreation is concerned. But what about other motivations?
For example, is self-esteem best served if having sex?
Is the best way to heal frustration, to have sex? (It's rather contradictory, for if contraceptives fail, another great frustration comes.)
2. Are all these motivations such that acting on them will increase the quality of one's life?
(It is assumeed that people are after a greater quality of life.)
* * *
This is rather impossible, is it not? A woman who is "frigid" or has a "phobia about sex" will not have a compassionate partner in the first place anyway.
She may take counselling or therapy -- but to what avail, if there is no real-life proof that it is or could be effective?
Does your advice also include that the woman in the course of this threapy or counselling be made to accept that abortion is an acceptable risk?
Somebody, maybe you Water, should take all this, draw some conclusions, and write a book about it. I would buy it just to see what conclusions are drawn. You could write it in several languages too!
[off-topic, do not read!]
However, there is the question of whether there would be a publishing house anywhere that would want to publish it. Might not fit in with their version of reality, at least not here in the U.S.
[back on topic]
Anyway, I think we still have a ways to go to get to those conclusions. Don't stop thinking and writing everybody. This is a good thread.
P.S. I think I have tried to come across as something that maybe I am not. When I said earlier that I would be with a woman that wouldn't have sex with me unless for pro-creation, I think I was trying to be noble. However, real life, day to day, it WOULD be very difficult, for me at least. So maybe part of me would want to be noble, while another part of me would crave the sex. It would be interesting, to say the least, to see what would happen in that situation. Could be very rewarding for both of us, if we both could be honest with each other about our needs and feelings, or it could turn into a nightmare if we decided it was gonna be too much work but were afraid to talk about tit.
P.S. I think I have tried to come across as something that maybe I am not. When I said earlier that I would be with a woman that wouldn't have sex with me unless for pro-creation, I think I was trying to be noble. However, real life, day to day, it WOULD be very difficult, for me at least. So maybe part of me would want to be noble, while another part of me would crave the sex. It would be interesting, to say the least, to see what would happen in that situation. Could be very rewarding for both of us, if we both could be honest with each other about our needs and feelings, or it could turn into a nightmare if we decided it was gonna be too much work but were afraid to talk about tit.
Does this mean that you would only marry a woman who would be willing to have abortions?
I know that humans are not always reasonable. Some are sometimes, some may never be. Some try to be, but find it too hard, give up and fail. Is there a solution? I don't know. I haven't really found one yet, other than to say that we do try our best sometimes, some of us do really want to be what to us is reasonable and good sometimes, but that life in general for some can be very difficult and we don't always succeed. Myself, I find it very hard to be reasonable sometimes. I find it hard to be good sometimes. But, for the most part now, I at least am trying. It's hard not to give up though.
Not if they will listen to you while you try to explain what you know of the ins and outs of pitfalls you think they might encounter along the way. Not if you are willing and able to work for them as much as you work for yourself to figure things out. Hopefully I'm not just spouting bullshit.The problem is that the youth do not have a clear idea of who they are or what they want. Giving them such advice ("Do what works for you") will only confuse them.
Please tell me why you think this! According to my Bibles, and based on my experiences with it, I find it very hard to satisfactorily serve and obey God in everything that He demands of us. Maybe I expect too much of myself.Not at all. The irony is, that it takes extremely little to serve and obey God!This is where I think you are misguided. "If people indeed serve and obey God," then they must indeed be near perfect.
How does God want us to be, in your opinion? What is God's standard of perfection or excellence in your opinion? To me, and this is what I was taught and have gleaned from the NKJV of the Bible, I think He wants me to devote every aspect of my life to Him, accept Him (Jesus), as my personal saviour, recognize that He died on the cross for my sins (according to the southern Baptist interpretation of the Bible), so that I might someday join Him in Heaven. This is all that I think He wants from me, in reality. Do you agree with this?They do, yes. But this is because those religions demand *human* standards of "perfection". Humanly perfect means something along ' beautiful, blond, strong, young, healthy, white, with a good, decent job, healthy'.Humans are nowhere near perfect, nor should they be taught that they can or should be. This is exactly what leads young kids into failure and self-doubt and self-hate. Religions set children up for failure and disillusionment.
Maybe not. Maybe I am wrong. That is why I am here. I want to find peace and purpose in my life after having none of either for probably 15 years now. I'm just no longer convinced that any God exists.I think it is nmot fair of you that you insist on not seprating God from His children. Anyone who considers himself to be a child of God, is not necessarily a child of God.Thus, in my opinion, so does God. I can't separate God from his "children," nor will I try anymore, at least not right now.
All I have to go on are two things. What people have said God has said, and what my experience has taught me. God has never talked to me. He has never, I think, told me what He wants of me. Maybe He has though, in the sense that He is subtle and works in a way that I don't really understand. I don't really know. With regards to sex, all I know is it is easy to hurt someone and be hurt as well. Sex can be a very risky and dangerous thing. I don't think I ever really found what I was looking for in it. Maybe I was looking for the wrong things.Yes, but all this is because we still depend on others to tell us who we are and what we are worth.Yes, but again you forget that we are human, not perfect Gods. People expect too much from other people, while at the same time not giving them enough credit for what they are capable of suffering and overcoming. We are at once too critical and expect too much. I wish we could find some good middle ground. Some have. Some never will.
When, on the other hand, we also believe it is only God who can tell us those things.
Yes, and I'm sure it will remain open for eternity. However, I was conditioned a certain way, and I think I am breaking out of it. Maybe there is hope for us.What about the youth? -- They do not have the experience to refute the social conditioning they are exposed to.Experience.Anyway, my point is -- on what basis do you refute the usual social conditioning?
So the argument is still open.
* * *
Christians will probably say that "natural" sex is sex between a man and woman, but only after they get married, and never with anyone else in their entire lives (just that person they married). (if one dies, it is okay to re-marry and have sex with the new husband and wife.) Sex in these cases is okay for pleasure and for procreation.Sure, I intuitively agree with you. But. What is "natural"? Can you define it?
Mormons, you would expect something similar, yet with many wives. I'm not as familiar with what they believe.
Muslims, somebody will have to help me out with what they believe in this regard. I don't know really. I would expect it is similar to the above though in some ways, and different in others.
Some modern people think it is okay to have sex with any and everybody they want to.
Swingers love having sex with just about anybody, and the more the merrier. (I wish I were a swinger sometimes.)
Anyway, what is natural to some will probably be unnatural for everybody else. I don't think we will or can ever come to a consensus on one natural way to have sex. You just have to look at all the possibilities and find what works for you. Trial and error. Pleasure and Pain. Can't really have one without the other.
There is not one best way. There is only your current best way. You will probably make mistakes. This is okay, if you can live with the mistakes.1. Is sex the best way to act on these motivations, will sex give the most satisfying results to these motivations?
I don't think there is a best way to do anything. This smacks of that perfectionist thinking again. There may be many ways to build your self-esteem or to heal your frustration, but I think one way works differently for one person over another. You kind of have to take what you were taught as a kid, analyze it if it is not working for you, look at other ways that might work for you, try them, fail, try another, succeed hopefully. If nothing works, you either kill yourself ( if you feel you have to), or you just exist until you find something that does work.For example, is self-esteem best served if having sex?
Is the best way to heal frustration, to have sex? (It's rather contradictory, for if contraceptives fail, another great frustration comes.)
If you were taught things as a child that work for you, hold onto them. Don't let them go, unless you feel that some other way will be better for you. If you do try that new thing, and it doesn't work, go back to what did at least marginally work. Thus my acceptance that I could be wrong about God. That I might need to go back to what I was taught someday, though I am angry about it. I don't fucking know!
Sex is NOT important to everyone. Go to frigid.com or something, find a dude (or dudette if you prefer) that is also frigid, talk about it with him/her, and find a way to understanding and happiness. I think that is a frigid persons best bet, if such a place exists. Otherwise, you may wait a lifetime to just bump into someone you need, unless, of course, there is a God and He helps you out a little.This is rather impossible, is it not? A woman who is "frigid" or has a "phobia about sex" will not have a compassionate partner in the first place anyway.* Therapy, counselling and the patience of a compassionate partner.
She may take counselling or therapy -- but to what avail, if there is no real-life proof that it is or could be effective?
God, please help me shorten my posts!!!
No. There are other ways, like, oh what is it called for the man? kldfkljflfkllklfkjdskldfklkl. Whatever it's called when a man gets his tubes snipped (meh)? Isn't that foolproof, and reversible? So, a man and woman could have sex for pleasure, and then if someday they wanted a child or children, the man could hopefully (pray to whatever God you can) get it reversed, hope his sperm are good swimmers and her eggs fertile, have kids, and then guess what comes next. After you've had all the kids you want, you get your tubes tied.P.S. I think I have tried to come across as something that maybe I am not. When I said earlier that I would be with a woman that wouldn't have sex with me unless for pro-creation, I think I was trying to be noble. However, real life, day to day, it WOULD be very difficult, for me at least. So maybe part of me would want to be noble, while another part of me would crave the sex. It would be interesting, to say the least, to see what would happen in that situation. Could be very rewarding for both of us, if we both could be honest with each other about our needs and feelings, or it could turn into a nightmare if we decided it was gonna be too much work but were afraid to talk about tit.
Does this mean that you would only marry a woman who would be willing to have abortions?
"Lol"?No. There are other ways, like, oh what is it called for the man? kldfkljflfkllklfkjdskldfklkl. Whatever it's called when a man gets his tubes snipped (meh)? Isn't that foolproof, and reversible? So, a man and woman could have sex for pleasure, and then if someday they wanted a child or children, the man could hopefully (pray to whatever God you can) get it reversed, hope his sperm are good swimmers and her eggs fertile, have kids, and then guess what comes next. After you've had all the kids you want, you get your tubes tied.Does this mean that you would only marry a woman who would be willing to have abortions?
Even tying the tubes is not 100% safe.
how do you bring to the attention of this woman the fact she needs proffesional help?
counselling and therpay work for you, but what happens to the woman when therapy and counselling are unsuccesful? do you apply the "something wrong with you?"label?
or do you tell her to take her medication as you did to me when you had failed to understand me?
we need to work with these constructs dont we. here i think is the foundation of much of our porblems.
* * *
on reflection everything is natural even the distortion that occurs is a natural process the energy utilises to achieve its goal.Sure, I intuitively agree with you. But. What is "natural"? Can you define it?
can i define natural? natural is that which occurs without force from the conditions that are present.
the distortion? that which occurs with force is distorted. force being some variable that alters conditions or process. sorry thats the best i can do.
the focus of appeal.Why do you think this sells so well? There must be a reason for such a demand of such media.the magazines you mention take such things as natural beauty and the need for attention, esteeem and self esteem. they make such things artificial, to be bought and sold to pamper the ego.
why has pregnancy become the option that most choose? i could only geuss i have never had to make that decision myself.Why? Pregnancy and birth are more certainly more risky than abortion. So why choose a greater risk?hardly an option but an option and the most often chosen.
possibly, possibly not, sorry to go all limp on you but this would depend entirely on the situation.I'm glad you provided this list!
I am wondering:
1. Is sex the best way to act on these motivations, will sex give the most satisfying results to these motivations?
if it is self esteem relating to sex, possibly, possibly not.It certainly is as far as procreation is concerned. But what about other motivations?
For example, is self-esteem best served if having sex?
sexual frustration needs a sexual release whatever way it comes. people take the risk day in day out they enjoy it or they dont but they live with the results for the rest of their lifes. that does not mean it is a must a an ideal or the right way to go, it just is what people choose or dont choose.Is the best way to heal frustration, to have sex? (It's rather contradictory, for if contraceptives fail, another great frustration comes.)
2. Are all these motivations such that acting on them will increase the quality of one's life?
(It is assumeed that people are after a greater quality of life.)
no. [people are after a greater quality of life. there is a suggestion that even suicide is the attempt to make life better.]
Serving God is only hard if you at the same time also wish to please the world.
A man cannot serve two masters.
This is how you know God, so far, yes.How does God want us to be, in your opinion? What is God's standard of perfection or excellence in your opinion? To me, and this is what I was taught and have gleaned from the NKJV of the Bible, I think He wants me to devote every aspect of my life to Him, accept Him (Jesus), as my personal saviour, recognize that He died on the cross for my sins (according to the southern Baptist interpretation of the Bible), so that I might someday join Him in Heaven. This is all that I think He wants from me, in reality. Do you agree with this?
"I think He wants me to devote every aspect of my life to Him" -- exactly. This is what He wants. The rest you said there is your way of knowing how to devote every aspect of your life to Him.
I think you are most likely convinced that the god you have believe in so far does not exist. Which is good.Maybe not. Maybe I am wrong. That is why I am here. I want to find peace and purpose in my life after having none of either for probably 15 years now. I'm just no longer convinced that any God exists.
It is the haze of this world that prevents you from recognizing God's works in your life as such.All I have to go on are two things. What people have said God has said, and what my experience has taught me. God has never talked to me. He has never, I think, told me what He wants of me. Maybe He has though, in the sense that He is subtle and works in a way that I don't really understand. I don't really know.
"Lack of understanding of the true nature of happiness, it seems to me, is the principal reason why people inflict sufferings on others. They think either that the other's pain may somehow be a cause of happiness for themselves or that their own happiness is more important, regardless of what pain it may cause. But this is shortsighted, no one truly benefits from causing harm to another sentient being. Whatever immediate advantage is gained at the expense of someone else is short-lived. In the long run causing others misery and infringing their rights to peace and happiness result in anxiety, fear and suspicion within one-self. Such feelings undermine the peace of mind and contentment which are the marks of happiness."With regards to sex, all I know is it is easy to hurt someone and be hurt as well. Sex can be a very risky and dangerous thing. I don't think I ever really found what I was looking for in it. Maybe I was looking for the wrong things.
-- H.H. the Dalai Lama from The Dalai Lama: A Policy of Kindness, published by Snow Lion Publications.
You fail to see that sexual intercourse is to conceive children, and it is only within a safe and loving marriage that children should be conceived and reared.Christians will probably say that "natural" sex is sex between a man and woman, but only after they get married, and never with anyone else in their entire lives (just that person they married). (if one dies, it is okay to re-marry and have sex with the new husband and wife.) Sex in these cases is okay for pleasure and for procreation.
Otherwise, you doom the child to misery.
Such that causes no damage and is performed for the conception of children within a safe and loving marriage.Anyway, what is natural to some will probably be unnatural for everybody else. I don't think we will or can ever come to a consensus on one natural way to have sex.
This is never possible. One cannot try out everything.You just have to look at all the possibilities and find what works for you. Trial and error.
This is where you are gravely mistaking. Gravely mistaking.Pleasure and Pain. Can't really have one without the other.
Eating ten pieces of chocolate will not give you ten times as much pleasure as eating one piece of chocolate.
There is one best way to do any thing.There is not one best way. There is only your current best way. You will probably make mistakes. This is okay, if you can live with the mistakes.
/.../
I don't think there is a best way to do anything. This smacks of that perfectionist thinking again. There may be many ways to build your self-esteem or to heal your frustration, but I think one way works differently for one person over another. You kind of have to take what you were taught as a kid, analyze it if it is not working for you, look at other ways that might work for you, try them, fail, try another, succeed hopefully. If nothing works, you either kill yourself ( if you feel you have to), or you just exist until you find something that does work.
When you are hungry, eat.
When you are tired, rest.
When you are happy, smile.
When you are sad, cry.
This is all.
Yes.
Okay.on reflection everything is natural even the distortion that occurs is a natural process the energy utilises to achieve its goal.
can i define natural? natural is that which occurs without force from the conditions that are present.
the distortion? that which occurs with force is distorted. force being some variable that alters conditions or process. sorry thats the best i can do.
You.can.do.better.than.that.the focus of appeal.Why do you think this sells so well? There must be a reason for such a demand of such media.
Why is what that media has to offer so appealing, why do people want to have their ego pampered?
(Bear with me.)
I am the only woman posting in this thread, right? This is not fair for the argument.why has pregnancy become the option that most choose? i could only geuss i have never had to make that decision myself.
Oh, I think it is rather clear.1. Is sex the best way to act on these motivations, will sex give the most satisfying results to these motivations?
possibly, possibly not, sorry to go all limp on you but this would depend entirely on the situation.
Eating is for stilling hunger, not for feeding emotional needs, for example, like some bulimics do.
Rest and sleep is for resting, not for running away from dealing with trouble (sleeping, like even 15 hours a day).
Etc.
We often tend to do things for the wrong/inadequate reasons, we do not heed our motivations directly, but with sublimations, compensations, transpositions.
We do not smile when we are happy, neither cry when we are sad, to put it plainly.
When angry with someone, we repress it, and become passive aggressive. -- Such is the social conditioning. A child, angry at another child, is told "You must not hate, you must not be angry", and the child behaves, but as the frustration of having to repress the hate and the anger builds up, the child releases it elsewhere, possibly by causing material damage, for example.
The same way, I believe meanings and motivations are ascribed to sex that are not inherent to sex. And thus, sex does not satisfy them. Just like eating does not relieve the pain of being rejected, for example.
EXACTLY. Why act on those motivations then, if they are detrimental?2. Are all these motivations such that acting on them will increase the quality of one's life?
no.
It is like throwing money out of the window.
Why are some ignorances of personal needs, desires so acceptable, even expected and demanded?
Yes, in that situation, from the perspective of the person attempting suicide.[people are after a greater quality of life. there is a suggestion that even suicide is the attempt to make life better.]
Please answer these two questions, and give me specifics please.
1.) Why do you think "it takes extremely little to serve and obey God?"
2.) What does serving and obeying God entail to you?
Eagerly awaiting your response.
not so, my mother was 17 when i was born, my farther left before my birth. he later married and had more children. my mother raised me by herself. things where not perfect but i had a better life than some.
where do you get the idea that marriage is the ideal? how do you guarantee no damage, even love can suffocate.Such that causes no damage and is performed for the conception of children within a safe and loving marriage.
The things we do for the world are mostly hard to do. It takes a lot to look all dolled up and behave like a "normal modern woman", for example -- but such is the way to please the world. If your god is money, you know that you have to work hard for it, or risk a lot (as in theft).1.) Why do you think "it takes extremely little to serve and obey God?"
To please the world and the worldly gods, we must be willing to sacrifice our health, our possessions, and most of all, our peace of mind. God wants no such thing of you.
So I say it takes extremely little to serve and obey God.
Having my thoughts focused on Him all the time.2.) What does serving and obeying God entail to you?
Such is the ideal, of course; we do get distracted as we are bound by our worldly existence. But we are able of that focus, at least to know what it is like.
Having your thoughts focused on Him does not mean you have to meditate or pray 24/7. You can most easily do your daily work, and think of Him all along.
Then consider yourself most blessed.
Many children raised by single parents are not well.
In the present socio-economical situation, marriage is the ideal.where do you get the idea that marriage is the ideal?
Then it is not love.how do you guarantee no damage, even love can suffocate.
like i said the focus of appeal. these things appeal to our nature, our natural energies.using the terms from my defintion earlier they are the force that alter the condition or process. the ego finds such things pleasurable.
would you prefer me to geuss then? it is more acceptable. if abortion had not received so much negative attention women may be more able to consider termination. as it is taboo they are left to Lie in the bed they have made.I am the only woman posting in this thread, right? This is not fair for the argument.
yes, these are distortions.We often tend to do things for the wrong/inadequate reasons, we do not heed our motivations directly, but with sublimations, compensations, transpositions.
i hate the "we" word though,
"we" has the implication that we are all the same. that we are all in the same position and react the same to the same stimuli.We do not smile when we are happy, neither cry when we are sad, to put it plainly.
When angry with someone, we repress it, and become passive aggressive. -- Such is the social conditioning.
i do smile when i am happy and i cry when i experience grief. i agree with what your saying genrally however "we" are conditioned to not function naturally. the conditions that we find ourselves in our not conducive to natural healthy growth, those influences (glancing back at free will) have distorted our natural evolution. those infleunces are forces that have altered conditions or process. the forces or influence are part of evolution also, they have followed ther own natural process to their greatest abiltiy and have themselves been influenced by external forces. playboy/cosmo magazine have also evolved to what they are today. atittudes toward sex and abortion of have evolved out of the social conditions and the relationship between inner and outer experiences of those needs.
and so more healthy ways of understanding ourselves is needed the self need s to be aware of inner state able to express what it feels. there needs to be less external restriction on what is accpebatble for the self to expereience and express.A child, angry at another child, is told "You must not hate, you must not be angry", and the child behaves, but as the frustration of having to repress the hate and the anger builds up, the child releases it elsewhere, possibly by causing material damage, for example.
but "we" have not learnt better ways of geting our needs met.The same way, I believe meanings and motivations are ascribed to sex that are not inherent to sex. And thus, sex does not satisfy them. Just like eating does not relieve the pain of being rejected, for example.
why take a shortcut through the alley to get to the shops?? to get to your sweets to fill your belly without having to walk around the block. sometimes i prefer the walk around the block and will wait for my sweets or do without, but not always, my urges can be very powerful too.EXACTLY. Why act on those motivations then, if they are detrimental?
there is some degree of satisfaction. if something wasnt working it would be left behind. although some of "us" realise that there is greater satisfaction and more fulfilling ways of achieving some of "us" have not. "we" are not all the same.Why are some ignorances of personal needs, desires so acceptable, even expected and demanded?
it would be more beneficial if you could understand why you think it does not? it seems like you think god is making soime huge demands from you. where does this come from?
serving and obeying means serving and obeying but can you be sure that is what god wants from you?2.) What does serving and obeying God entail to you?
serving and obeying sounds very restrictive and inhibiting of the individual.
My interest here is getting way off topic, so I am going to start a new thread about serving and obeying God. I hope you Ellion and Water and any other who wishes to will comment on it in the religion sextion. I do think my expectations of what God wants me to do to serve and obey Him may be skewed, but I think that is really the unknown in this world, for everybody. I am interested in others' opinions, and I hope you will feel like commenting in the new thread.
P.S. Water, watch your "We's" when it comes to Ellion.
yes do please, and also watch your "you's"
P.S. Water, watch your "We's" when it comes to Ellion.
we seem to have moved away from the topic
why are people expected to behave a certain way under certian circumstances no matter what there experience of the situation is?
why is there an endevaour from many to meat and embrace those expectations?
where do the expectations originate? surely the source of all these is not singularly playboy/cosmo or freud!
i also realise that the terms i use in some of my posts above are rather slippery if you notice any inconsitency raise them for me.
I have expected this answer.
Why does the ego find such things pleasurable?
I think you are way off the mark here.would you prefer me to geuss then? it is more acceptable. if abortion had not received so much negative attention women may be more able to consider termination. as it is taboo they are left to Lie in the bed they have made.
And it is not taboo, the abortion itself is not a taboo. Not among women.
What is a taboo is that this *is* murder. It is a socially acceptable kind of murder.
The whole problem of modern "free" sexuality is this:
The "sexual health" of a man comes at the potential cost of the mental and physical health of a woman and possibly the life of another person.
It is this disproportion that is perplexing.
Feminism is the corollarium of the patriarchate. Men, in their seeking to satisfy their sexual desires, have first abused the social organization of the patriarchate. As that began to fall apart, the idea of feminism developed, as a compensation. Feminism is the male dream come true: women believing that their sexuality is the same as that of men.
And so feminism teaches women to behave like men when it comes to sex. For women, it takes mental twisting to do that though: the woman has to believe that abortion or unwanted pregnancy are acceptable outcomes.
It seems absurd why women accept that risk. Yet they do. And why? Is the sexual urge really so great? I don't think so.
I say women are willing to accept that risk because they believe that the most important thing in their life is "romantic love" (in its many versions) and that without it, they are nothing. And to get that "romantic love", now when the patriarchate no longer makes sure that a woman would get married and the man be responsible for her, to get "romantic love" means to have sex with a man.
"A man's love must be earned, and it is earned in bed, otherwise a man will not love a woman" -- this is the message the popular social conditioning is sending.
All my female classmates believe that they are nothing without a man. Marriage, or "romantic love" is the goal in their life, and they are willing to go over dead bodies for that.
Man and/or romantic love have become their god. The patriarchate at its worst best.
I know, I was looking for a different phrasing, but couldn't find a more suitable one at the time.i hate the "we" word though,
Easily said. How many people know what they truly want, and are after that?and so more healthy ways of understanding ourselves is needed the self need s to be aware of inner state able to express what it feels. there needs to be less external restriction on what is accpebatble for the self to expereience and express.
This doesn't absolve us from the responsibility to find those better ways!but "we" have not learnt better ways of geting our needs met.The same way, I believe meanings and motivations are ascribed to sex that are not inherent to sex. And thus, sex does not satisfy them. Just like eating does not relieve the pain of being rejected, for example.
There is no excuse to indulge the ignorance of our true needs and the most adequate ways to meet them.
If some motivations are detrimental, it would be reasonable to assume that the best is to not act on them, would it not?why take a shortcut through the alley to get to the shops?? to get to your sweets to fill your belly without having to walk around the block. sometimes i prefer the walk around the block and will wait for my sweets or do without, but not always, my urges can be very powerful too.EXACTLY. Why act on those motivations then, if they are detrimental?
Greed, lust, resignation, frustration -- indulging them only leads to more detriment.
But what satisfaction! And what cosequences!there is some degree of satisfaction. if something wasnt working it would be left behind.
A very good question!1.) Why do you think "it takes extremely little to serve and obey God?"
it would be more beneficial if you could understand why you think it does not? it seems like you think god is making soime huge demands from you. where does this come from?
Indeed. But this is due to our experience with serving and obeying as such.2.) What does serving and obeying God entail to you?
serving and obeying means serving and obeying but can you be sure that is what god wants from you?
serving and obeying sounds very restrictive and inhibiting of the individual.
I think most people have made very negative experiences with authorities (those in authoritarian positions often abuse that position), and this has shaped their understanding of authority as such -- that an authority cannot be trusted.
So it is not that it would be hard to acknowledge God's authority and obey it and serve it -- it is hard to acknolwedge authority as such, any authority, and this is so because the authorities we have experienced so far have abused us, have been injust. We thus reasonably expect that God, as an authority, will also abuse us, be injust to us.
But to think so of God is to project worldly standards onto Him.
Water,
I am in tears over the sheer beauty of the sentiment and thoughts that you have expressed in this most wonderful of threads. Please, allow me to worship thy glorious nature all the days of my life and I shall die a happy man if I only had a moment to glance upon your beautiful visage in the flesh. And to have your wonderful words drop on me like raindrops from the heavens.
I worship you.
this is something i dont know, why is chocolate pleasurable? why can the pleasure of chocolate be made more desirable and the urge to satifaction stronger while at the same time erroding the will to resist tempation, through the focus of appeal.
i disagree, from my experience abortion will be met with some form of judgement, and when a termination has been carried out the subject is definitely taboo.I think you are way off the mark here.
And it is not taboo, the abortion itself is not a taboo. Not among women.
What is a taboo is that this *is* murder. It is a socially acceptable kind of murder.
do women have not have sexual needs. i have never deprived any woman of their mental or physical health in oredr to maintain my own sexual health. how do you percieve this happeningThe "sexual health" of a man comes at the potential cost of the mental and physical health of a woman and possibly the life of another person.
are you measuring your own sexuality and saying that all women have the same sexuality as you?As that began to fall apart, the idea of feminism developed, as a compensation. Feminism is the male dream come true: women believing that their sexuality is the same as that of men.
even if you arent you are denying women of there sexuality. i know women that are far worse than me, in all manner of ways, in bed, on the pull, there sense humour, and i think it is great, they are not distorting their nature they are not repressing anything they are allowing themselves to be human.
are you measuring your own sexuality and saying that all women have the same sexuality as you?
okay, you definitely need to own this. you are not speaking about women here you are speaking of yourself.For women, it takes mental twisting to do that though: the woman has to believe that abortion or unwanted pregnancy are acceptable outcomes.
now we need to seperate you from the women you are identifyng with. why do you accept that risk?it seems absurd because it is not present in anyone else to the same extent it is present in you. does that make sense?It seems absurd why women accept that risk. Yet they do. And why? Is the sexual urge really so great? I don't think so.
i need to know you are following me to continue with this.>
I say women are willing to accept that risk because they believe that the most important thing in their life is "romantic love" (in its many versions) and that without it, they are nothing. And to get that "romantic love", now when the patriarchate no longer makes sure that a woman would get married and the man be responsible for her, to get "romantic love" means to have sex with a man.
"A man's love must be earned, and it is earned in bed, otherwise a man will not love a woman" -- this is the message the popular social conditioning is sending.
All my female classmates believe that they are nothing without a man. Marriage, or "romantic love" is the goal in their life, and they are willing to go over dead bodies for that.
Man and/or romantic love have become their god. The patriarchate at its worst best.
Ellion,
It has to do with the ego in general.Why does the ego find such things pleasurable?
this is something i dont know, why is chocolate pleasurable? why can the pleasure of chocolate be made more desirable and the urge to satifaction stronger while at the same time erroding the will to resist tempation, through the focus of appeal.
If we connect this to what was said about God so far, the ego is that which opposes God.
It's true that most women don't like to talk about it. But from my experience, it is more because they are hurt or confused, not because it were taboo.i disagree, from my experience abortion will be met with some form of judgement, and when a termination has been carried out the subject is definitely taboo.
I have never denied that.do women have not have sexual needs.
Go to the last paragraph.i have never deprived any woman of their mental or physical health in oredr to maintain my own sexual health. how do you percieve this happening
They are "allowing themselves to be human"? And "human" can be specified, as a list of characteristics?even if you arent you are denying women of there sexuality. i know women that are far worse than me, in all manner of ways, in bed, on the pull, there sense humour, and i think it is great, they are not distorting their nature they are not repressing anything they are allowing themselves to be human.
No, my argument is simple and objective: Any woman who engages in sex and knows that she can conceive, also beforehand has some ideas on what she will do if she does conceive. There are only 3 options from here on:are you measuring your own sexuality and saying that all women have the same sexuality as you?
1. to keep the child, because it is desired,
2. to keep the child, even though it is unwanted,
3. abortion/adoption.
While option 1 needs no further explaining, it is significant why 2 or 3 are chosen -- based on what motivation does a woman choose option 2 or 3?
That's the crux: It is part of the objective argument. Unless the woman is ignorant, or believes that she will "think about it when she gets pregnant, if she gets pregnant", she has some formed beliefs on what to do in case she conceives.okay, you definitely need to own this. you are not speaking about women here you are speaking of yourself.For women, it takes mental twisting to do that though: the woman has to believe that abortion or unwanted pregnancy are acceptable outcomes.
It is certainly not present in every woman to the same extent. An ignorant woman, or one that believes she will "think about it when she gets pregnant, if she gets pregnant" certainly doesn't think much about that risk, and it probably doesn't appear much like a risk to her.now we need to seperate you from the women you are identifyng with. why do you accept that risk?it seems absurd because it is not present in anyone else to the same extent it is present in you. does that make sense?
Take your position.i need to know you are following me to continue with this.>
I say women are willing to accept that risk because they believe that the most important thing in their life is "romantic love" (in its many versions) and that without it, they are nothing. And to get that "romantic love", now when the patriarchate no longer makes sure that a woman would get married and the man be responsible for her, to get "romantic love" means to have sex with a man.
"A man's love must be earned, and it is earned in bed, otherwise a man will not love a woman" -- this is the message the popular social conditioning is sending.
All my female classmates believe that they are nothing without a man. Marriage, or "romantic love" is the goal in their life, and they are willing to go over dead bodies for that.
Man and/or romantic love have become their god. The patriarchate at its worst best.
Exquisite.
(Come on. Concede the damn point.)
Invert,
Contribute on topic or stay away.
Bye.
Quote stretched:
“* Therapy, counselling and the patience of a compassionate partner. “
Quote water:
“This is rather impossible, is it not? A woman who is "frigid" or has a "phobia about sex" will not have a compassionate partner in the first place anyway.
She may take counselling or therapy -- but to what avail, if there is no real-life proof that it is or could be effective?”
* Dear water. 8) A partner is always going to be a matter of choice? Unless you are in a culture of arranged marriages. I suppose it would make a vast difference whether the woman in question, has identified herself as “frigid” or “phobic”, and wants to change this state of affairs. If she can identify her partner as an obstacle in her path forward, she could “choose” to toss the partner out. It is quite possible to be VERY content without a partner. When and if, the next potential partner comes along, the person in question may be more qualified to make positive choices.
Quote w:
“Does your advice also include that the woman in the course of this threapy or counselling be made to accept that abortion is an acceptable risk?”
* Talking here about penetrative sex right? No woman can be “made” to accept any issue regarding this. I don’t think anyone should need to accept abortion as an ACCEPTABLE risk. Life is always going to remain sacred. Carrying a foetus has deep-seated emotional consequences. The frequency of unplanned pregnancy when due precaution is taken, is extremely minimal. So generally the issue of pregnancy wont even become an important part of the counselling. Having said that, if in the case that we are in all probability discussing here, traumatic abortions were part of the case history, that could well be the fundamental issue underlying the “frigidity” and “phobia”, and the general “yucky” feeling towards sex. The therapy then would swing towards dealing with the “how’s”, “whys”, and residue of the abortion/s and what potential positive outcomes can be planned for the future. There are solutions to moving forward, a lot of which may hinge on the self-esteem (holistic) of the person in question.
Quote ellion:
“how do you bring to the attention of this woman the fact she needs proffesional help?”
* Heh. Million dollar question. It is not up to me or anyone else to suggest that anybody needs “professional” attention. It remains a choice made by an individual. Normally peer pressure would indicate to somebody that they are different, and that maybe the should investigate the issue. Most often though, it would be the partner of the “person” in question that would convince her/him that they have a problem. The irony here is that it is OFTEN the partner who has the problem. Heh.
Quote ellion:
“counselling and therpay work for you, but what happens to the woman when therapy and counselling are unsuccesful? do you apply the "something wrong with you?"label?
or do you tell her to take her medication as you did to me when you had failed to understand me?”
* Touché mate. 8) I apologise for the misunderstanding. In life, when for whatever reason, and in whatever circumstance, we start hitting our head against the wall, we are faced with choices. We can choose to do “something” or we can choose to do “nothing”. There are never any guarantees, but inaction is a guarantee of zero progress. If a person has identified that they have a problem (honestly identified) and they desire to improve there are ways of achieving this. Therapy could be as simple as chatting to a friend or as complex as hospitalisation and a course of medication. Fortunately for everyone, the only person who can definitively apply the “something wrong with you” label, is the individual him/herself. If someone honestly believes they have a problem, they can seek help.
8)
(warning: OFF TOPIC!)
Quote w:
“If we connect this to what was said about God so far, the ego is that which opposes God.”
* Is this a good thing or a bad thing?
stretch,
Please refrain form that. We both know that I am no more dear to you than a thorn in your foot.* Dear water.
??A partner is always going to be a matter of choice?
No. Unless the woman is really beautiful and overwhelming, she cannot just go and "choose" partners. A partnership is usually a combined effort of two.
If she is "frigid" or has "a phobia about sex", then no man will want to have anything to do with her anyway. Thus, she will remain "frigid" or "having a phobia about sex", if she is to depend in any way on a "compassionate partner".
So there is no talking about “* Therapy, counselling and the patience of a compassionate partner. “
You advise a woman who is "frigid" or "has a phobia about sex" to seek counselling or therapy, and in this counselling or therapy she gets told sex (penis-to-vagina intercourse) is normal, and it is normal to not have unwanted children.* Talking here about penetrative sex right? No woman can be “made” to accept any issue regarding this. I don’t think anyone should need to accept abortion as an ACCEPTABLE risk.“Does your advice also include that the woman in the course of this threapy or counselling be made to accept that abortion is an acceptable risk?”
This also means that she gets told abortion is normal, just that she is not told that flat out.
I have asked you before whether you would want to have an exclusive intimate relationship with a woman who would not have sex with you, except for procreation. You have not answered ...
That does not matter. Unless, of course, you wish that it is ideal for a woman to think "I will think of pregnancy when I get pregnant, if I get pregnant."The frequency of unplanned pregnancy when due precaution is taken, is extremely minimal.
How not? You think all women are short-sighted?So generally the issue of pregnancy wont even become an important part of the counselling.
And they get told abortion is okay. If it is so okay, then why do most women not look forward to it??If someone honestly believes they have a problem, they can seek help.
Considering that the ego is not its own author and cannot justify its own existence out of itself, neither can it provide for the rights it assumes it has, clinging to the ego is ultimately not a good thing.
8)
Puter just dumped my post. Herewith condensed version.
Quote w:
"No. Unless the woman is really beautiful and overwhelming, she cannot just go and "choose" partners. A partnership is usually a combined effort of two.
If she is "frigid" or has "a phobia about sex", then no man will want to have anything to do with her anyway. Thus, she will remain "frigid" or "having a phobia about sex", if she is to depend in any way on a "compassionate partner".
So there is no talking about “* Therapy, counselling and the patience of a compassionate partner. “
* You are being unrealistically negative. It remains simple. You can stay with a partner or leave. Time and time again.
Quote w:
"You advise a woman who is "frigid" or "has a phobia about sex" to seek counselling or therapy, and in this counselling or therapy she gets told sex (penis-to-vagina intercourse) is normal, and it is normal to not have unwanted children.
This also means that she gets told abortion is normal, just that she is not told that flat out. "
* Are you saying intercourse is abnormal? Are you saying abortion is norman? If yes, why? If no, I don`t understand your point?
Quote w:
"I have asked you before whether you would want to have an exclusive intimate relationship with a woman who would not have sex with you, except for procreation. You have not answered ... "
* As a fairly healthy individual, I would not choose to have that type of relationship. (to prove what to who?) If however, during the course of a relationship, an incident occurred that resulted in my partners sexual phobia, that would greatly influence my decisionmaking.
Quote w:
"That does not matter. Unless, of course, you wish that it is ideal for a woman to think "I will think of pregnancy when I get pregnant, if I get pregnant."
* Choices. Be honest about what you are up to. Entrapment aint clever.
Quote w:
"How not? You think all women are short-sighted?"
* No, but in my experience most woman seek treatment to improve relationships, not to fall pregnant. This is sometimes the reason though.
Quote w:
"And they get told abortion is okay. If it is so okay, then why do most women not look forward to it??"
* Who said it is ok? Abortion is an extremely unfortunate event.
Eh.
No."You advise a woman who is "frigid" or "has a phobia about sex" to seek counselling or therapy, and in this counselling or therapy she gets told sex (penis-to-vagina intercourse) is normal, and it is normal to not have unwanted children.
This also means that she gets told abortion is normal, just that she is not told that flat out. "
* Are you saying intercourse is abnormal?
Yes. Because normalcy and pleasure come first.Are you saying abortion is norman? If yes, why?
(This is not my personal opinion, but this is what sexual education teaches women.)
In other words, you only want a woman who will be willing to have an abortion, if she falls pregnant, and who will silently go thorugh with it."I have asked you before whether you would want to have an exclusive intimate relationship with a woman who would not have sex with you, except for procreation. You have not answered ... "
* As a fairly healthy individual, I would not choose to have that type of relationship. (to prove what to who?) If however, during the course of a relationship, an incident occurred that resulted in my partners sexual phobia, that would greatly influence my decisionmaking.
And if she would in any way be "loud about it", your decisionmaking would lead you to leave her ...
QED.
Abortion is an extremely unfortunate event, but it is okay. You would not have something intimate to do with a woman who would not be willing to have an abortion if she falls pregnant."And they get told abortion is okay. If it is so okay, then why do most women not look forward to it??"
* Who said it is ok? Abortion is an extremely unfortunate event.
Blah, Blah Blah.....
In circles we all go (in this thread at least).
No, it is just that a nerve has been hit: You only want a woman who is willing to have abortions, and have them silently, with no talking about it.
But you don't feel like admitting that, just like Invert didn't.
Vascectomy (spelling?)!!!! That is the word (the minor operation) I was trying to recall earlier. Water, I think you know that is untrue about me, at the least. I don't like the thought of abortions any more than you, even though I am not really a Christian any longer. At least you have made me think more seriously about it. My conclusion, I want sex, sure. I don't want my partner to have to either have an abortion or an unwanted child. I don't want to have a child currently. My ex-wife and my last serious girlfriend used the pill (depro-provera, I think) and in 4+ years of sex with the two of them, neither ever got pregnant. Not to say they couldn't or wouldn't eventually, unless all my damn anti-depressants have made me sterile; nonetheless, if they were that worried about getting pregnant, I would get a vascectomy. I am not sure about the efficacy of a vascectomy, but I think that this is 100% effective. Correct me with proof if I am wrong please.No, it is just that a nerve has been hit: You only want a woman who is willing to have abortions, and have them silently, with no talking about it.
But you don't feel like admitting that, just like Invert didn't.
Stop stereotyping all men. Or stop baiting me, if that is what you are doing.
No. I'm just finding out who the real patriarchal white trash is, and see how they defend their position.
So, do you think I am patriarchal white trash?No. I'm just finding out who the real patriarchal white trash is, and see how they defend their position.
Men want to penetrate women. Fact.
Why because they want to dominate them.
Why because they want to own them.
Have you ever had a platonic relationship with a woman? (not just the girlfriend of a friend), I mean a lasting relationship without sex. No, maybe for a few weeks but then you wanted to have sex with her. Why was that? because you have to have sex for pleasure? I dont think so, if you can go six months without a girlfriend and without sex and seemingly enjoy life, then why as soon as you get close to a girl do you 'have' to have sex to enjoy yourself. No its because if you have sex with her (you believe) that you will dominate her and in some way assume ownership of her.
On a more placating note.
I am sure society puts pressure on both men and women to have sex and enjoy it (maybe more so on men); I mean have you every heard a man say he doesn't like sex, I mean not one on the whole earth - is that possible?
I believe in past times it was acceptable for a man, possibly a women not to be interested in the opposite sex - to lead a bachelor life. But now this is not so. - If you dont like boys you must be a lesbian; if a boy doesnt like girls he must be gay. Either way you are going to have sex and enjoy it, because society says so.
Surely as evolved humanity we should be learning to control our sexual urges, as we control our anger. Not letting them run unchecked to cause whatever damage / disease / aborted lives they may cause!
Vashti's Daughter (by the way, who is Vashti?),
I can understand what you are saying. I can also understand where Water is coming from. I don't like the fact that people get hurt in this god-damned world everyday. I've cause a lot of pain and suffering in my life for my brothers and parents when I was a child, for cats, for my ex-wife and girlfriends, for my friends and family as an adult, for people I don't even know, but who pissed me off in one way or another, maybe even some people in these forums in the month or so I've been back on the internet.
I don't like this about myself, and I am trying to change it. With regard to your previous two messages, I have not had sex in over 3 years, and yes, by choice, not lack of opportunity. There is a part of me that knows I have a tendency to hurt those I am with. I am tired of hurting others, and being hurt. I don't want to dominate. That is the one side of me, the good side, the Dr. Jekyll side, you could say.
Then we get to the Mr. Hyde side. This side of me does want nothing more than to dominate, to control, and eventually to hurt those around me. At times, I wish I could just exterminate all of the human race, and let the real animals flourish. Why do I have this side? I don't really know for sure. I've got many theories, but I don't really know. I have been this way since I was very young, I know that.
These two sides of me (and no they are not two different personalities), are in constant conflict. I am an extremist, a perfectionist, when it comes to either side. I have to love really well, or I fail. I have to hurt really well, or I fail. I haven't been able to find any acceptable (to me) middle ground, until maybe very recently, and even now, I don't really trust myself.
So I have chosen to withdraw, to not have any relationships, and god-damnit I wish my mother would stop fucking calling me every 4 hours or so, though deep down I love her more than anyone on this planet, in my own way.
I don't really know what else to do.
But I do know how you can feel the way you do about men. Just remember, or learn it if you never have, that not all men can be lumped into one barrel. Not all are really bad.
Cottontop3000,
No.So, do you think I am patriarchal white trash?
* * *
Vashti's Daughter,
This is a patriarchal explanation, it has its merits though. Heterosexual relationships are designed for procreation, after all, and no wonder man wants to have sex and own the woman -- he is merely taking care of his potential offspring.Men want to penetrate women. Fact.
Why because they want to dominate them.
Why because they want to own them.
Have you ever had a platonic relationship with a woman? (not just the girlfriend of a friend), I mean a lasting relationship without sex. No, maybe for a few weeks but then you wanted to have sex with her. Why was that? because you have to have sex for pleasure? I dont think so, if you can go six months without a girlfriend and without sex and seemingly enjoy life, then why as soon as you get close to a girl do you 'have' to have sex to enjoy yourself. No its because if you have sex with her (you believe) that you will dominate her and in some way assume ownership of her.
Yet, with the dissolution of the patriachate, most of what comes after sex dissolved as well, and what remained is the act itself.
If they could afford to live single -- this was esp. problematic for women. Unless a woman had an inheritance or a family to live at, if she was unmarried, she either could become a nun (if she had luck), or was facing a life in poverty, possibly as a prostitute.I believe in past times it was acceptable for a man, possibly a women not to be interested in the opposite sex - to lead a bachelor life.
I don't think it is the sexual urges that are to be controlled -- what needs to be controlled is the human proclivity for compensations. And it is so often the basic instincts that are employed when trying to satisfy other, more complex needs.Surely as evolved humanity we should be learning to control our sexual urges, as we control our anger. Not letting them run unchecked to cause whatever damage / disease / aborted lives they may cause!
| « Attraction | Smiles » |
| Bookmarks |
Bookmarks |
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
