Sexual liberation

[blackrave]

oh boo freaking hoo "some people have different moral standards that me!" well too bad

how others aproach their sexuality is not "morally the same" across the board...where do you draw th eline anyway? whats the acceptible number of sexual parters? 2? 4? 7? if the girl you were with somehow had 7 boyfreinds beofre is she a whore now?

and that vagina becoming loose is bullshit I'm pretty sure

Not "different", but rather "stupid" and "self-degrading"
Because humans are generally amoral
What woman wants? To fuck strongest, meanest male and then raise that child with some nice and friendly wimp.
What man wants? To fuck as many females as possible.
Reproductive instincts 101, people.

Also why anyone needs to draw The Line? Attempts to generalize morals are the reason why rape victims are shunned and occasionally stoned to death.
But everyone can have their own personal line. My line? 1? I'll let it slide, experiments and first experiences are fine. 2? You're kinda promiscuous. 3-5? You've entered "slutty" territory. 5 and more? Yep, whore.
You consider these some sort of unreasonable standards?

P.S.Do you have vagina? And if vaginas didn't became loose over time, there wouldn't be vaginal muscle training exercises. Unfortunately most females are starting to think about this problem only when it is a bit too late. As usual maintenance is much more easier than repair.

See? This person has a specific attitude toward promiscuity that is leveled against both men and women indiscriminately.

Well, you cannot use one person as an example.
There are plenty of people, who think that men being slutty is ok, but if a women starts to behave in similar manner, then she should be covered in pitch, feathers and exiled from society.
And while there is logical (and biological) reasons for that, from moral point of view both whores are doing wrong.

 

[Stasisesque]

oh boo freaking hoo "some people have different moral standards that me!" well too bad

how others aproach their sexuality is not "morally the same" across the board...where do you draw th eline anyway? whats the acceptible number of sexual parters? 2? 4? 7? if the girl you were with somehow had 7 boyfreinds beofre is she a whore now?

and that vagina becoming loose is bullshit I'm pretty sure

Not "different", but rather "stupid" and "self-degrading"
Because humans are generally amoral
What woman wants? To fuck strongest, meanest male and then raise that child with some nice and friendly wimp.
What man wants? To fuck as many females as possible.
Reproductive instincts 101, people.

Also why anyone needs to draw The Line? Attempts to generalize morals are the reason why rape victims are shunned and occasionally stoned to death.
But everyone can have their own personal line. My line? 1? I'll let it slide, experiments and first experiences are fine. 2? You're kinda promiscuous. 3-5? You've entered "slutty" territory. 5 and more? Yep, whore.
You consider these some sort of unreasonable standards?

P.S.Do you have vagina? And if vaginas didn't became loose over time, there wouldn't be vaginal muscle training exercises. Unfortunately most females are starting to think about this problem only when it is a bit too late. As usual maintenance is much more easier than repair.

Do you have a vagina? Kegel exercises are to strengthen pelvic muscles, not to keep the vagina from becoming 'loose'. There are things that can weaken the muscles, but these include childbirth, aging, over-large instruments (sex toys, even penises if large enough) and improper use of certain techniques (see: fisting). Also included are things like severe obesity, and some surgeries. Not, however, frequent sex. Kegels are also recommended for people with urinary incontinence, and to help keep men from ejaculating too soon.

Also, just out of curiousity what is your age range for the number of sexual partners? A woman in her 40s is quite likely to have had more than 2 sexual partners in her life, would she be a whore? Why would she be in the same category as a girl in her late teens or early twenties?

 

[Belated]

Sexual liberation seems to focus on female sexuality, though you know, males are more sexually liberated now too. Not just gay guys, guys in general are free to enjoy whatever sort of sexual adventures they want legally - with some exceptions. Sexuality has a deeper psychological meaning and it's transcended well beyond procreation and well, it has a whole different purpose now, as 99% recreational activity. And that's awesome.

So, my question for all genders, sexualities, and species is, do you feel sexually liberated? Is that important to you?

Sexual liberation is very important to me, but I don't feel liberated yet.

Being straight has never been taboo, but I can still be ridiculed for what I specifically find attractive in women. For example, take the absolutely appalling response to the Dead or Alive 5 creators having the audacity to do what their fans wanted them to. Shock and horror! (Seriously, why were people upset about this? A company giving the fans what they wanted? That's what a company SHOULD do! I bet Star Wars fans wouldn't be upset if George Lucas did what they wanted!) All because the fan's requests had to do with unrealistic bouncy breasts. Why? What's wrong with liking unrealistic bouncy breasts? I can't help that I find it attractive. I didn't choose to be attracted to stuff like that. Yet, Jim Sterling made a particularly childish video whining about it, and everybody just nodded their heads like sheep. Oh yes, it's trendy now to hate people like me. It's okay to look at me as a freak for an attraction I didn't choose to have. An attraction that's totally harmless, I might add.

What the hell?

And now they wanna take booth babes away. Why? Because some pansies can't handle the sight of a little exposed skin? If we're really talking about equality here, let's get some booth hunks to market to people who are attracted to men. I would love to see a convention that had equal amounts of attractive women and attractive men advertising games. I fail to see why it's so important to rid our conventions of booth babes, especially considering that people who AREN'T booth babes are allowed to dress just like them in some of their costumes. So clearly, it's not an issue of decency. If it's a family event with children, fair enough. Go ahead and cover up. But if you're marketing mostly to the adult gamers, then allow some adult themes!

It's not seen as wrong to like women, it's not seen as wrong to love women. But I'm not really allowed to be sexually attracted to women anymore, it seems. It feels like the gaming community, and this forum in particular, are waging a war on sexiness. "But those breasts disgust me. They make me not want to play the game." they say. So what? If those breasts turn you off of the game, then don't play the game. If the game is disgusting to you, then the game wasn't made for you. It was made for those of us who do like that stuff. Those of us who call ourselves the fans. How is it right for you to impose your own standards of attractiveness on our game? Just because you don't enjoy it doesn't give you the right to take it away from those of us who do.

And no, it doesn't contribute to sexism. Nobody is going to play Dead or Alive 5 and then miraculously come to the conclusion that women shouldn't be allowed to vote anymore. That's ridiculous. People who weren't sexist aren't going to become sexist after playing a game, and people who were sexist are going to stay sexist regardless. Simply featuring attractive women in a game does not set women back. All it does is appeal to the fantasies of people who find those women attractive. Why is it wrong for me to fantasize? And why is it wrong for me to fantasize with a video game? It's as if we're against masturbation now or something. Is this The Escapist, or is this Catholic School? And no, it's not a "negative image of gamers" either. There's nothing "negative" about having a normal, healthy sexual appetite, like a human being. The negative image doesn't come from us doing something wrong, it comes from our puritanical society perceiving us as doing something wrong. That's their fault, not ours. And frankly, screw them. Haters gonna hate.

On top of that, the way we treat fetishists, both inside and outside of the gamer community, is even worse. I don't know if my attraction to unrealistic breasts counts as a fetish or not, but I know I have another fetish that can definitely be considered a fetish. To protect myself, I won't say what it is. But I will say it's nothing illegal or harmful.

There's a certain something I find attractive in women that nobody else thinks about, because it's a fetish. There have been times when I've told people about this fetish, and received extremely negative responses to it. I've been called "disgusting", or "weird". I have friends who have this fetish. One of these friends was caught by her mother one day, while she was practicing it. Her mother rejected her for it, and forced her to see a psychologist to try to "cure" her. I'm not making this up.

But it's not just my fetish that's treated like a disease in this supposedly "modern" society. Just look at the response to "50 Shades of Gray". That book is an awesome thing, because it advances the social acceptability of BDSM fetishism. I think it's a great step forward, and I'm thinking of picking it up myself. And yet, some closed-minded assholes called it "promoting domestic abuse". They do not understand the fetish, so they fear it, like the cowards that they are.

This is the reason why I don't feel sexually liberated. Wake me up when I'm allowed to be attracted to women again. Wake me up when I'm allowed to have a fetish, when fetishists finally get the acceptance they deserve. We think we're liberated because gays and straights can be gay and straight freely. But sexuality is not limited to those two camps. There's so much more left to liberate. We're not even close to done.

 

[llubtoille]

I think there's a MAJOR difference here.

When a guy cheated on his wife, he was slapped around a few times.
When a girl cheated on her husband, she/is stoned to death.

A Vietnamese woman I worked with kept telling stories about how cheating husbands would find the unmentionables sliced off.
some reattached... some fed to the dog... others the blender ><
probably not as bad as being stoned to death, but made me shudder to think.

Obviously it all depends on your country, some are a lot more 'liberated' than others.

I wouldn't say i feel sexually liberated, it's still a fairly taboo topic that usually is only mentioned in conversation between lovers or friends.
But I don't think there'll be a point in my lifetime where you can casually talk about sex in the same manner that you'd talk about work.

 

[Vault101]

[b/]Not "different", but rather "stupid" and "self-degrading"[/b]
Because humans are generally amoral
What woman wants? To fuck strongest, meanest male and then raise that child with some nice and friendly wimp.
What man wants? To fuck as many females as possible.
Reproductive instincts 101, people.

wow....can you see mount Everest from that hoarse your on?

my issue here is that you are SERIOUSLY and utterly convinced your moral standpoint here is absolutely 100% correct

its one thing to go out every night and fuck everything that moves (which I wouldn't consider healthy and I would question the character of someone like that HOWEVER in the end it is their right to do so and I don;t see the act of sex itself to be immoral...regardless of weather or not its with a spouse or a one night stand)

[quote/]Also why anyone needs to draw The Line? Attempts to generalize morals are the reason
why rape victims are shunned and occasionally stoned to death.[/quote]
draw the line because I want to see exactly where we stand here and where your coming from


[quote/]But everyone can have their own personal line. My line? 1? I'll let it slide, experiments and first experiences are fine. 2? You're kinda promiscuous. 3-5? You've entered "slutty" territory. 5 and more? Yep, whore.[/quote]

....0_0....dear god....no wonder your having trouble (not a personal attack just an assumption on my part)..this is ridiculous

2? kind of promiscuous..so lets say I had a boyfriend once when I was 18 and we did it..but then it wasnt working out so we broke up....a year later I have another boyfriend..relationship last for 2 years before we mutually break it off...acording to you thats [i/]kind of promiscuous?[/i]..no...its not thats actually pretty friggen modest

3-5? after a certain time most people could have that amount of relationships...and thats slutty?...dear god

also a whore is somone who is paid...I find refering to women as a whore outside of the actual meaning kind of sexist (just my opinion of coarse)



[quote/]P.S.Do you have vagina? And if vaginas didn't became loose over time, there wouldn't be vaginal muscle training exercises. Unfortunately most females are starting to think about this problem only when it is a bit too late. As usual maintenance is much more easier than repair.[/quote]
its fucking myth..or at least not as bad as your making it out to be
http://www.scarleteen.com/article/advice/a_few_choice_words_about_tightness
http://www.scarleteen.com/article/advice/lets_let_this_be_the_last_word_on_worn_out_vaginas_shall_we

 

[MorganL4]

I think there's a MAJOR difference here.

When a guy cheated on his wife, he was slapped around a few times.
When a girl cheated on her husband, she/is stoned to death.

Female liberation is FAR from over.
Look at the differences in pay for women, or the whole 'when a girl acts like a guy she's a slut' mentality, or most of the Middle east, or...

Well, luckily as of 2009, if you live in the USA thanks to the Lilly Ledbetter Act, if you find out that someone who is doing the exact same job as you at the exact same company is making more than you, you can then go and complain and they will legally HAVE to bring up your pay ( exceptions to this are things like: You have been there for 6 months while Greg has been there for 6 years and has gotten an annual pay increase.) But other than that.... Yeah.

 

[Tigerlemur]

oh I got another one.....when a photo or video of a girl gets passed around among all the schools/ guys phones in the area...people will gawk..mabye call her a slut

but nothing is said of the asshole who sent it out in the first place.....it actually makes me angry because of how damaging somthing like that is

Ahh!! Ahh!! The generalizations! It burns! Just kidding!

Seriously though, this happened at my high school. Guy had his girl perform oral on him on his video phone... It got around and, obviously, the girl was mortified. For a while, she was a little shunned... But the guy? HAH! The guy's name was--... Well, honestly, it doesn't matter. He gained a fun nickname, "McNasty" (He had Mc"Blah" as a last name). He was also expelled. And now works a dead-end job and lives with his parents.

The best part is that, as it turns out, she was really only shunned by friends of the guy. No one else really cared. They thought the guy was far more scumbag than the girl was slut, rightly so, of course. She was doing something to either prove her "loyalty" of putting out, or did it out of misguided love or..whatever. He perverted it.

She was doing pretty well last I checked, but I didn't really know her personally.

On to the original topic stuffs!!!:
Sexual liberation... Uhm, I agree with the fact that I've never really felt oppressed, nor do I feel particularly liberated. I have my girl, she has me and we enjoy each other's company where we can get away with it... Living at home during college makes it hard, but not impossible. In truth, I don't blame my parents for setting "No Snoo-snoo" rules under their house. If my parents were staying at my house, I wouldn't want them snoo-snooing under my roof either.

Edit: Hope my anecdotal evidence restores some of your faith in humanity, Vault101! (Btw, I love all of your dog-thing avatars... You were the one with Garrus-dog-shotgun, right?)

 

[Vault101]

Ahh!! Ahh!! The generalizations! It burns! Just kidding!

ha I know...its just whenever I heard of this kind of thing back then I wouldnt relaly hear of the guy...eather way the Idea of spreading such a thing out of spite or otherwise is kind of sexist, of coarse my veiw could be rather skewed in that regard since it was all rumours and gossip

ALSO now that I think about it...this is one of the "media fenzy" type issues Ive heard about which could exagerate things mabye...I remember we were actually warned about this kind of thing back then XD


[quote/]Edit: Hope my anecdotal evidence restores some of your faith in humanity, Vault101! (Btw, I love all of your dog-thing avatars... You were the one with Garrus-dog-shotgun, right?)[/quote]

why thankyou...and yes that was me XD

 

[DarthSka]

I don't really know the difference between being sexually liberated and, what, non-liberated? My sexual nature just, is. All I got growing up sex wise was, "wait until marriage," but I never got any real talk on the matter. I haven't had actual intercourse but I've engaged in some activities with my girlfriend, and we intend to wait for the actual act. That's mostly for emotional reasons as well as reducing the chance of pregnancy to zero. So, I feel fine with how I am.

On a side note, I notice that some people are still pissed that you can't be naked in public. You know what, I'm fine with that. I generally don't want to see other people naked, attractive or otherwise.

 

[LittleThestral]

Nope. I grew up with the "if you have sex before marriage your wiener will fall off/vagina will shrivel and you will DIE WITH AIDS" bullshit, had a promise ring foisted upon me (no purity ball, though, thank Astania), and managed to make it to age 22 as a virgin.

Even though I'm an atheist, and even though I know the arguments against premarital sex or biological females enjoying sex or anything other than missionary style, through the sheets, with the lights out, involving ONE penis and ONE vagina are all bullshit, I have a tough time with sex. I tend to worry that I think about it too much, or not enough, or that I shouldn't have phone sex, or that I should have more, or that I shouldn't enjoy it, or that she's not enjoying it, or that having sex will fuck up our relationship, or that not having enough will fuck it up, or or or or or.

A tiny part of me still fears that I'm going to burn in Hell for having sex and, you know, enjoying it. Then again, I'm a neurotic Southerner (USA) with a dysfunctional, fundamentalist Christian family that was isolated for 8 years because, in 2nd grade, the school librarian read my class books like "I Have Two Daddies".

I'm not qualified to give a general statement on the state of sexual liberation in modern society, is what I'm saying.

 

[bman804]

I am sexually liberated only in that I really do not care about other people's sex lives. I think just accepting that other people have different attitudes about sex is more important than what you do sexually. As long as it is consensual.

 

[blackrave]

Do you have a vagina? Kegel exercises are to strengthen pelvic muscles, not to keep the vagina from becoming 'loose'. There are things that can weaken the muscles, but these include childbirth, aging, over-large instruments (sex toys, even penises if large enough) and improper use of certain techniques (see: fisting). Also included are things like severe obesity, and some surgeries. Not, however, frequent sex. Kegels are also recommended for people with urinary incontinence, and to help keep men from ejaculating too soon.

Also, just out of curiousity what is your age range for the number of sexual partners? A woman in her 40s is quite likely to have had more than 2 sexual partners in her life, would she be a whore? Why would she be in the same category as a girl in her late teens or early twenties?

Ok, I admit that you might be right on this. (90% hit chance, 4 damage, 15% critical chance)
My knowledge came mostly from women after 30 and with at least 1 kid

My preferred age range is +/-5 years from my own age, so it would be 19-29 years
Why would someone have short-term relationships? It isn't worth the emotional and physical investment.
Also I forgot to mention one thing. All these numbers are for a decade. Of course after 30 years of active sexual live one would have much more than 5 partners.

wow....can you see mount Everest from that hoarse your on?

my issue here is that you are SERIOUSLY and utterly convinced your moral standpoint here is absolutely 100% correct

its one thing to go out every night and fuck everything that moves (which I wouldn't consider healthy and I would question the character of someone like that HOWEVER in the end it is their right to do so and I don;t see the act of sex itself to be immoral...regardless of weather or not its with a spouse or a one night stand)

I'm pretty sure you meant "horse" not "hoarse"
There is nothing wrong in having high moral standards as long as you yourself follow them.
And what's wrong in expecting similar standards from your partner?

Well of course YOU don't, but I'm not you :/


[quote/]....0_0....dear god....no wonder your having trouble (not a personal attack just an assumption on my part)..this is ridiculous

2? kind of promiscuous..so lets say I had a boyfriend once when I was 18 and we did it..but then it wasnt working out so we broke up....a year later I have another boyfriend..relationship last for 2 years before we mutually break it off...acording to you thats [i/]kind of promiscuous?[/i]..no...its not thats actually pretty friggen modest

3-5? after a certain time most people could have that amount of relationships...and thats slutty?...dear god

also a whore is somone who is paid...I find refering to women as a whore outside of the actual meaning kind of sexist (just my opinion of coarse) [/quote]

I already previously mentioned that I meant it in decade (just forgot to write it down)
It is a rule of hand for me- if I can't count all your previous partners in last 10 years on one hand, than you have no chance with me. And the more total number is closer to zero the better.

Also people have tendency to mistake words "prostitute" and "whore"
Prostitute is a person who provides sexual services for money
Whore is a person who often changes sexual partners
Prostitute=/=whore

Lastly, can you explain me calling woman a whore is sexist?
Because calling man a whore isn't sexist, but as soon as I call woman a whore I'm suddenly chauvinist?
Such double standard itself is sexist.


[quote/]
its fucking myth..or at least not as bad as your making it out to be
http://www.scarleteen.com/article/advice/a_few_choice_words_about_tightness
http://www.scarleteen.com/article/advice/lets_let_this_be_the_last_word_on_worn_out_vaginas_shall_we[/quote]

Again I previously mentioned that my information regarding that matter came from older women with kids, so I might be slightly wrong here.

But thanks for the links, especially second one, they were entertaining

 

[Vault101]

Ok, I admit that you might be right on this. (90% hit chance, 4 damage, 15% critical chance)
My knowledge came mostly from women after 30 and with at least 1 kid

it pays to know thease things before you start judging people on them.....

[quote/]
Why would someone have short-term relationships? It isn't worth the emotional and physical investment. [/quote]
[quote/]There is nothing wrong in having high moral standards as long as you yourself follow them.
And what's wrong in expecting similar standards from your partner?[/quote]
to answer that....
see my problem with the first statement is not just an inability to understand others peoples reasons/motivations (ok we all get that somtimes) but that coupled with some pretty..strange "moral" standards is setting yourself up for disappointment, not saying you can;t have standards but at least trying to understand other people and re-thinking thease things is agood somtimes, especially if you are finding yourself unsuccessful

that and you think less of people for not having the same moral standards as you...on an issue that is not as cut/dry as you make it out to be (unlike murder or theft)

[quote/]
I already previously mentioned that I meant it in decade (just forgot to write it down)
It is a rule of hand for me- if I can't count all your previous partners in last 10 years on one hand, than you have no chance with me. And the more total number is closer to zero the better.[/quote]
a decade?.....yeeeeeeaaaah my initial reaction remains the same...I mean WHAT? 2 parters in 10 years is "kind of promiscious" as you put it? HAHAHAHAHA oh lawd *shakes head* 5 partners in 10 years isn't even *that* bad if your not counting casual encounters


[quote/]Lastly, can you explain me calling woman a whore is sexist?
Because calling man a whore isn't sexist, but as soon as I call woman a whore I'm suddenly chauvinist?
Such double standard itself is sexist.[/quote]

its not per'se. Just one of those uses of words and casual attitude that raises little flags,

kind of like...

[quote/]As for "liberated" girls, you can be as "liberated" as you want, just somewhere far away from me.[/quote]
so you meet a nice girl...but then find out she's been with a few people...then you wouldnt want anything to do with her?...I do hope you only mean that in a relationship context..and not everyday life (dare I ak)

[quote/]"No, the fact that you treat sex as some sort of sport, doesn't make you right. You know that eventually you'll have sack instead of vagina, right?"[/quote]

little spiteful dont'cha think?


if I were to go there I do find it carries more weight when applied to females than to males even if that wasn't your intention...due to our society and how we veiw things (because lets face it...male and females are not interchangeable in the way we view them)



but anyway thats getting off-topic

see I have a problem with mixing sex and morality..it just doesnt make sense to me...I think its absolutely ridiculous to question the moral character of somone based PURELY upon how much sex they have

if you ask me what I think of a girl who sleeps around constantly....well I'd have to know more than that..[i/]sure[/i] I can make some assumptions , which I know is easy to do..we all do that (which may even turn out to be correct) but honestly amount of sex doesn't tell me much....if she's a nice person, if she holds down a job. if she does drugs or steals or anything

quite frankly what we get up to in the bedroom is no ones damn buisness and not somthing we should be judged upon

have you had sex? I mean how do you know it will be any worse if shes been with a few people? how do you know if you enter a seriously relationship that she's going to love any any less?

 

[Hagi]

What woman wants? To fuck strongest, meanest male and then raise that child with some nice and friendly wimp.
What man wants? To fuck as many females as possible.
Reproductive instincts 101, people.

I think my instincts and those of the majority of people might be broken...

Just the other day I was walking through town, seeing plenty of females around, and found myself strangely unaroused. Not a single cell in my body was screaming at me to fuck all those women. I just walked there... seeing all those women... and nothing... no enraged lust, no massive erection... I just walked...

And then I got home, opened up the paper, and read this column from a woman complaining about sexual harassment. I mean can you imagine? There she is and this big strong man is proposing sex in the meanest way possible and she's strangely not feeling any lust at all. She should obviously be massively aroused, held back only by her strong moral convictions. But apparently all she felt was anger, how fucked up is that?

One would almost imagine that the 'instincts' you propose merely reflect the actions of a mostly harmless minority and that most people are in fact perfectly capable of enjoying sex responsibly and appropriately without the need for a harsh judgemental morality to counteract the otherwise uncontrollable lusts that plague the depravity that is humankind.

But that can't be... We obviously need to insult people who've had multiple sexual partners in their past by calling them whores and sluts. Without such condemnations everyone would clearly be ruled solely by their animal lusts and society itself would crumble. Thank god we have people like you, ready to pounce on anyone thinking about enjoying sex for the act itself. You sir are the only thing standing between a civilized society and massive depraved orgies in the middle of the street.

 

[AngloDoom]

I've never really felt as if anything to do with sex was 'off-limits' to me. Age fourteen most of the people I knew were regularly having sex without any kind of backlash. I've had access to pornography pretty much just as I hit puberty and I've been in highly passionate and loving sexual relationships as well as having sex just for funsies.

That said, I know that it's pretty much all to do with the fact that I'm male. Hell, most women I know are still uncomfortable even admitting they've masturbated or even looked at porn but people will quite naturally assume a male regularly does both.

My sexuality has never ever felt suppressed by anything other than my own looks and personality but I would certainly say that there is a lot more to consider if you happen to have a vagina rather than a penis.

 

[blackrave]

to answer that....
see my problem with the first statement is not just an inability to understand others peoples reasons/motivations (ok we all get that sometimes) but that coupled with some pretty..strange "moral" standards is setting yourself up for disappointment, not saying you can;t have standards but at least trying to understand other people and re-thinking these things is good sometimes, especially if you are finding yourself unsuccessful

that and you think less of people for not having the same moral standards as you...on an issue that is not as cut/dry as you make it out to be (unlike murder or theft)

Understanding and supporting aren't the same things
I really do understand that having any freedom is awesome
But there is such a thing as "too much freedom" and in this context I feel that our culture is at this point right now.


[quote/]
a decade?.....yeeeeeeaaaah my initial reaction remains the same...I mean WHAT? 2 partners in 10 years is "kind of promiscuous" as you put it? HAHAHAHAHA oh lawd *shakes head* 5 partners in 10 years isn't even *that* bad if your not counting casual encounters[/quote]

But I am. Casual encounters and one night stands are sexual contacts too.
The very term "casual encounter" is insulting for me
There isn't anything "casual" about sexual relationship, there shouldn't be anything "casual" about it.
But I think this is the argument in which we won't be able to come to some sort of compromise.


[quote/]so you meet a nice girl...but then find out she's been with a few people...then you wouldn't want anything to do with her?...I do hope you only mean that in a relationship context..and not everyday life (dare I ak)[/quote]

Pretty much yes, been there, done that.
I simply cannot build long term romantic relationship with someone who don't share my beliefs on this matter


[quote/]little spiteful dont'cha think?

see I have a problem with mixing sex and morality..it just doesn't make sense to me...I think its absolutely ridiculous to question the moral character of someone based PURELY upon how much sex they have

if you ask me what I think of a girl who sleeps around constantly....well I'd have to know more than that..[i/]sure[/i] I can make some assumptions , which I know is easy to do..we all do that (which may even turn out to be correct) but honestly amount of sex doesn't tell me much....if she's a nice person, if she holds down a job. if she does drugs or steals or anything

quite frankly what we get up to in the bedroom is no ones damn business and not something we should be judged upon

have you had sex? I mean how do you know it will be any worse if shes been with a few people? how do you know if you enter a seriously relationship that she's going to love any less?[/quote]

Yeah, my sister was ignoring me for a week after that dialogue. :/

Really? I need to explain even this?
Ok, "amoral" in sexual discussion means different things than it usually means.
Of course having multiple partners doesn't make you neonazi sympathizer or pedophilia supporter.
Same as having high moral stand about sexual relationship doesn't mean you aren't racist or cannibal.
Moral isn't always moral, and amoral isn't always amoral.
(I don't know how better put this, so I hope you understand what I mean)

Anyway, it is good to expect not to be judged upon, except people are being jugged by other people, based on everything all the time. And same people are judging other people about anything all the time.
Not in a manner of getting pitchforks, torches and lynching someone, no. I mean that ANY information is piece of puzzle, to put together and make a picture of someone in your head. If you find some piece of information that doesn't fit in overall picture, you don't force it into picture and you don't ignore it, you should put it aside for a while- maybe after few more facts, you will find how it fits in.

And of course it isn't no ones business what you do in your bed. UNTIL you're approaching me with romantic intentions. Then it becomes MY GODDAMN BUSINESS, and if I don't like the state of business you won't get past "friend" status. Simple as that.
Is this principle making my life hard? Yes, but I won't drop this only because of some inconveniences.

I think my instincts and those of the majority of people might be broken...

Just the other day I was walking through town, seeing plenty of females around, and found myself strangely unaroused. Not a single cell in my body was screaming at me to fuck all those women. I just walked there... seeing all those women... and nothing... no enraged lust, no massive erection... I just walked...

And then I got home, opened up the paper, and read this column from a woman complaining about sexual harassment. I mean can you imagine? There she is and this big strong man is proposing sex in the meanest way possible and she's strangely not feeling any lust at all. She should obviously be massively aroused, held back only by her strong moral convictions. But apparently all she felt was anger, how fucked up is that?

One would almost imagine that the 'instincts' you propose merely reflect the actions of a mostly harmless minority and that most people are in fact perfectly capable of enjoying sex responsibly and appropriately without the need for a harsh judgemental morality to counteract the otherwise uncontrollable lusts that plague the depravity that is humankind.

But that can't be... We obviously need to insult people who've had multiple sexual partners in their past by calling them whores and sluts. Without such condemnations everyone would clearly be ruled solely by their animal lusts and society itself would crumble. Thank god we have people like you, ready to pounce on anyone thinking about enjoying sex for the act itself. You sir are the only thing standing between a civilized society and massive depraved orgies in the middle of the street.

Getting a little defensive aren't we >
Instincts can be suppressed by education and culture, true
But in the end of a day they are still there and you cannot get rid of it

P.S.And yes, I consider myself last bastion of morality, thank you for noticing, good sir.

 

[Vault101]

Understanding and supporting aren't the same things
I really do understand that having any freedom is awesome
But there is such a thing as "too much freedom" and in this context I feel that our culture is at this point right now.

no....I dont think you do understand...have you had sex before?

regardless you don't understand that sex Isn't the same for everyone, much like other kinds of expereinces it can be different and mean different things....you can't get it through your little head that sex may in fact simply be a pleasurable activity for some...this bothers you....for some reason... you don;t understand that your beliefs in sex are not universal for everyone


[quote/]
But I am. Casual encounters and one night stands are sexual contacts too.
The very term "casual encounter" is insulting for me
There isn't anything "casual" about sexual relationship, there shouldn't be anything "casual" about it.
[/quote]
to me its similar to you saying "video games are MENT to be played with others...its just plain wrong some people play by themselves"

again this is just you [b/]not getting it[/b] I'm nit saying you have to agree with casual sexual encounters but your not even fucking TRYING to understand that not everyone believes the same things you do.....and that is somthing I actually find insulting


[quote/]
Pretty much yes, been there, done that.
I simply cannot build long term romantic relationship with someone who don't share my beliefs on this matter[/quote]

fine....just don;t think you can go around applying such standards to EVERYONE you have to interact with on a day-to-day basis


[quote/]
Really? I need to explain even this?
Ok, "amoral" in sexual discussion means different things than it usually means.
Of course having multiple partners doesn't make you neonazi sympathizer or pedophilia supporter.
Same as having high moral stand about sexual relationship doesn't mean you aren't racist or cannibal.
Moral isn't always moral, and amoral isn't always amoral.
(I don't know how better put this, so I hope you understand what I mean)[/quote]
fine...but I still find it a little jerkish to tromp around acting high and mighty on somthing you seem to know little about (mabye you do, its just the impression I'm getting and often a trait of people like you)

[quote/]I mean that ANY information is piece of puzzle, to put together and make a picture of someone in your head. If you find some piece of information that doesn't fit in overall picture, you don't force it into picture and you don't ignore it, you should put it aside for a while- maybe after few more facts, you will find how it fits in.[/quote]
what...you simply cannot accept that somone likes to indulge in sex? you can't just accept it...you think less of them?

[quote/]
Is this principle making my life hard? Yes, but I won't drop this only because of some inconveniences.[/quote]
I dont think its a healthy attitude

[quote/]
Getting a little defensive aren't we >
[/quote]
pointing out somone saying somthign stupid is not defensive...of coarse acusing the other person of being defensive is somthing of a cheap attack

[quote/]P.S.And yes, I consider myself last bastion of morality, thank you for noticing, good sir.[/quote]
judgmental and close minded veiws....yes quite a beacon/sarcasm

 

[Hagi]

Getting a little defensive aren't we >
Instincts can be suppressed by education and culture, true
But in the end of a day they are still there and you cannot get rid of it

Really? You think culture and education is all that stands between men attempting to fuck every woman in sight and women spreading their legs for every man asserting his dominance?

No species with instincts that ludicrous could even begin to develop the very basics of any kind of culture or education, let alone hope to survive.

Do we have a sex drive? Yes.
Is that drive relentlessly pushing men to impregnate every woman they know and pushing woman to seek out the most brutal partners? Hell no.

If you feel you're going against your instincts by experiencing sex only in a loving intimate relationship then that's your problem. Don't blame it on the rest of humanity.

 

[Angie7F]

As much as i believe that sexual liberation is good, I just don't know how far it should go.
Do we ultimately go to a stage where you can have sex wherever and when ever we want because that is just nature, or is certain restraints still necessary?
I mean, the concept is attractive but it is a slippery slope.
For now I am quite happy with what I have now.