purity rings for girls but not for boys wtf

[chaz wyman]

Calling a person a slut IS a judgement of scorn.

what is your objection here

is it the word itself

or are you saying that being a slut is not in any way a bad thing at all

I don't call people sluts. You are making the negative judgement not me.
You are simply reflecting your own puritanical attitude and judging a person for their choice of sexual activity.
I imagine you are jealous that they are getting laid whilst you are not; that also makes you a hypocrite.

[artisticsolution]

Hi Chaz,

As a man it might not have occurred to you that there is actually a very good reason why girls seem to think sexual promiscuity is bad, other than religious reasons that is. I believe part of the reason is that we really don't get all that sexually aroused until later in life. Whereas men are pretty much good to go at any age. The only thing that keeps it in your pants is the fact that we say no.

Think about it this way...isn't it always easier to turn your nose up at food when your full rather than when you are hungry? Most girls aren't hungry. Hell...most young women aren't hungry...women in their 20's usually enjoy sex more because of other reasons rather than sex itself. In other words...it's mostly about the power, although I think few women understand this is happening to them much less admit to it (most women don't like to admit anything but good things about themselves).

What was really interesting is when I got into my 30's and actually started to enjoy sex for the pure pleasure of sex. I realized that there was a very different attraction going on than I had had before. The sex was no longer about power ( Not power as in something you realize you have as a young woman and lord over another...more like literal power that is unspoken that every women in her late teens and 20's has at her disposal without trying) it was more about actually wanting sex...similar to how I imagine a man desires sex. It was then that I was able to understand sex separate from what I learned in my youth, where it had to be accompanied by getting something in return for the "powerful gift" . I think this is what makes young girls think of sex as good/bad. I don't think it's all being a "puritan." It's more like not understanding the enjoyment to the degree a man does which is separate and apart from love. i.e. "good' sex is about getting love and a wedding ring and a baby...in that order and "Bad" sex is about giving it away for free. I hope I am making sense.

Anyway, I don't think you can understand unless you are a girl. You have to experience it to believe it...and it's not all about how society makes us think sex is bad...blah blah blah. It has to do with the fact that people usually think what they are is good and what others are is bad. Hence...if girls don't desire sex just for the sake of sex until they become women, they will demonize that behavior.

I sort of think this is why it is accepted more by society for men to be 'slutty' as opposed to women. Because men never experience this thing that keeps them from enjoying sex. They can get pleasure with no strings attached and without 'receiving' anything in return, unlike young women. But don't blame young women and call them puritan or hypocrites. They can't help how they feel. I mean if ya don't experience horndog...ya just don't experience horn dog...blame mother nature

Why do I get the feeling I am going to have to hear every woman here say, "Preposterous! I like sex for sex!" Or men say, "Not my woman...she loves what I give her!" Please don't kill the messenger...it's just a thing I have noticed growing up around women and being a woman. It has never been spoken...but knowing what I know in hindsight....even though not the most charming thing to mention...I still have to bring it to your attention.

[zinnat13]

Hi friends,

I would like to share some thoughts.

I feel that love covers much more space than sex. Sex is just a way of expressing love, like many others.

Let us first have a look at love.
I FEEL THAT LOVE CAN BE ROUGHLY DEFINED AS INTIMACY.
It may have sexual element or may not. Sex is a part of love but it is not an essential ingredient. I felt it many times and once again recently.

My wife had an operation about 15 days ago for removing uterus. She was not feeling well so we did not had any sex since more than a month and the doctor advised to keep precaution for further 3-4 months. It is long lime but I do not see any problem in that. I can still embrace her lightly; move my hands over her body and kiss her. This gave me the same satisfaction and feeling just as I use to have after proper sex or climax. There is no different at all. So, the act of physical sex is bypassed, yet, the last goal of feeling satisfaction is achieved. I think we may call it mental sex; because it was performed without physical body.

This reminds me of a saying- SEX LIES BETWEEN THE EYES NOT LEGS.

I do not see anything morally wrong in ‘I like sex for sex’. It looks simple and perfect at prima- facie, but, in my opinion, it is not possible.

To understand this notion, we have to examine sex; what is sex, how it happens and what we achieve from it.

We do not like sex for sex, but for pleasure and satisfaction, which we feel during and after sex.

Basically, sex is a physical act, which leads to the climax. During climax, we feel a pleasurable sensation in our body. This lasts only a few seconds, though some women may experience multiple orgasms. But, the process does not conclude here. After climax, we feel very satisfied. This satisfaction is the ultimate purpose of sex.
In initial age, especially up to the age of 25, it is more about curiosity or having fun. We all want to taste the forbidden fruit like Edam. It tends to give less satisfaction at mental level in that age. It is bit like drinking a whole bottle of wine bottoms up, instead of enjoying it by sip to sip.

Deriving pleasure from the sex is an art, thus, it is almost an inherited quality. It is applicable for both sides; giving and receiving. This is the ultimate aim of the sex, not the climax. We tend to learn it gradually with our experience, to some extent. This is the reason why we are able to draw out more pleasure from sex in mature age rather than young. As time goes, our partner also learns that which acts of his/her tend to give more pleasure, thus, he/she acts accordingly.

There is one more aspect of it. If the feeling of climax is enough or the ultimate aim of the sex, then masturbation or vibrators were enough to lead a happy sex life. Why do we need a partner for sex? The sensation of the climax is same, whether we feel it alone or with a partner. And why we even need a beautiful companion to have sex? The feelings of climax will the same with ugly one also. This very requirement differentiates humans from animals.

A male dog does not have any interest in the beauty of bitch during sex. It does not matter to him at all, but, for humans it is perhaps the most important issue in sex.

I sincerely think that Freud got it all wrong like dreams as he compared sex with normal physical desires like hunger or thirst. The reason is that these desires can be fulfilled successfully alone but the same is not about the sex, as it requires a companion too.

The pleasure of sex is directly proportionate to the level of intimacy with your partner. Sometimes giving pleasure is more pleasurable than receiving pleasure; because one can visualize or understand that, how much pleasure his or her partner is having. Hence, this visualization gives his/her a different kind of pleasure and satisfaction; this is what, that can be described as intimacy, and thus, love. This is the ultimate aim of sex not climax. This is the very reason why foreplay is more important and pleasure giving, than climax. A plain sex of five minutes does not serve any purpose. Perhaps, Freud mentioned about this kind of sex; as it is just like having a glass of water, after being thirsty.

Foreplay gives us a satisfaction, that there is someone, with whom, each and every part of body and mind, can be shared; honestly and lovingly. One can feel that the body of his/ her partner is also belongs to his/her and vice-verse. The existence of his/her partner is not separated from his/her own existence. This feeling of oneness is supreme and gives more satisfaction than the physical climax.

This is a beautiful feeling and that goes afar from the notion of sex. I do not have any hesitation in saying that it almost touches spirituality.

This is exactly what God said at the garden; CLINGS TO HIS WIFE, AND THEY BECOME ONE FLESH.

This ‘one flesh’ says all. But, I honestly feel that it requires a heart of woman to conceive it. It is a bit difficult for men, but, not impossible.

with love,
sanjay

[Kayla]

As a man it might not have occurred to you that there is actually a very good reason why girls seem to think sexual promiscuity is bad, other than religious reasons that is. I believe part of the reason is that we really don't get all that sexually aroused until later in life.

interesting

so the reason in find the idea of casual sex with a stranger, or anyone who is not at least a good friend, gross is because my hormones have not kicked in yet with full strength cause I am still a kid?

basically i cannot get interested in doing anything sexual with a boy unless i can first get affectionate with him in a nonsexual way

Hence...if girls don't desire sex just for the sake of sex until they become women, they will demonize that behavior.

demonize is a wrong word

i have friends who are promiscuous

i dont hate them i dont think they are horrible people i dont think they are going to hell

i do think that what they are doing creates expectations in boys that i do not like given my preferences - which a lot of girls do share

and in many cases they are doing it not because they like sex for the sake of sex but because they dont want anyone think they are stuck up or whatever, or in some cases its a weird thing its an addiction to something you dont like that much like cutting

what really bothers me though is the attitude boys have towards girls who are easy

i mentioned that i have hte power of invisibility and i can use it to listen in on peoples private conversations

i heard what boys say after they have sex with the easy girls

basically to them they are fucking a hole

i dont understand why anyone would allow themselves to be treated that way

I sort of think this is why it is accepted more by society for men to be 'slutty' as opposed to women.

then there is the thing that girls get stuck with all the down sides of promiscuous sex

its easier for us to catch STDs

HPV seriously increases our chances of uterine cancer while its at most a mild annoyance for guys

we can get pregnant guys cannot

its no surprise that men are so much in favour of girls being promiscuous as we have seen with chaz, much more so than women

basically the whole free love thing is more of old time sexism repackaged

[artisticsolution]

interesting

so the reason in find the idea of casual sex with a stranger, or anyone who is not at least a good friend, gross is because my hormones have not kicked in yet with full strength cause I am still a kid?

Nope, it's because you are a girl. Most girls feel this way. Most boys don't. Why do you think that is? Do you think it could be our physical make up?

If you were a boy...do you think you might be a little more horny? It's the horn dog thing that make a man desire to have casual sex. It's not because they can't get STD's...they can. It's not because they can't get pregnant, They can't...but they are just as responsible for the child by law...esp. these days...they will be paying up the ying yang.

And as far as boys talking about girls...I believe it is because they see sex as a form of conquer and that makes the girl the prey. And as such that makes her vulnerable....and most people...male or female...love to prey on vulnerable people. Sex is no different. But that does not mean that all boys do this...so one guys cumdumpster is another guys princess do no wrong. Have you ever known a guy to be head over heels in love with a promiscuous girl the world calls a slut? Ever hear the song "when a man loves a woman?" Have you ever known a guy to call a virgin a slut? I have. If he is a cruel person and sees he as lower status.

The truth is, men like sex in a completely different way than girls. And you being a girl cannot say how you will be as a woman...so never say never....you might be very surprised. Oddly enough...I have noticed that promiscuous women....tend to revery back to "puritan" in their senior years...when their sex drive once again diminishes. Odd thing the power of a sex drive....

[Walgekaaren]

Stop being so predictable. Let's hear you speak of the wrong doings of Kierkegaard or Nietzsche or someone you consider higher status than you. Let's hear you speak of your own wrong doings for that matter. Have you ever given thought about that?

W:Why should I speak bad of my friends who helped me the most.

AS:Did they help you more than God? Tell me...who do you really worship...these 'friends' or your God? Seems to me as if your trying to say....don't do what jesus does...do what Nietzsche does...like I said...pick a side...you can't have both if you wish to obey God and his 10 commandments.

Well I am confused now. This reply goes to all you have written, but this quote resonates to all of it, so I am trying to keep it short.

1. I dont deny the 10 commandments, or Jesus, I am following them by loving each person as I love myself, I just am not so misguided to say everything into nice in words than the reality is otherwise or always quote the bible, if there are other books people might have read more than the bible. I am just accepting the fact that all people arent Christian or even reading the bible. If I quote Kierkegaard then to show that I have found the Christian truth in it. Like I see the same thing in Nietzsches works. I see Jesus everythere. In every person. But I dont need to be a hippy in words and say "I love you" all the time, or use such kind of language as if I were to use that phrase. That's why I wont accept the quote from Aurelius.

2. You're asking me of speaking bad for no reason; without pointing out the reason to blame them, just because I judge morality. Well You cannot have a moral life, If you dont express it. And because you cant see my life, my words must do as a supstitute. - Since you didnt accept 'my sad story' as remark and nothing more. Then you are complaining that I am thinking and saying bad to all what is nice. Are you in some what of a way confused? What are we talking here? Because it makes me confused... If I say a book or a person has contributed to my faith, why wouldnt you accept it as it is? How can I say bad to all what is nice and at the same time judging on a moral level? - How can you condemn me in oposites, or are you following a Hegelian approach?

3. The reason I am arguing in that way, is to give others the same oportunities with or against me, I am using. If you want to judge me, be my guest. Philosophy is just a construct to help expression and thinking not my God.

My God is still Jahweh, the Lord of Hosts, who has sent us Jesus the Messiah and is proclaiming Himself through the Holy Spirit, who lives in every man. So any man can talk about faith and the other judge that say.

If you're taking this away, how are you even talking to me, that is also judging from a moral level. And then my stand has to be wrong? Confused, really confused here. Please help me out, and proove me wrong and dont give me hot air.

[artisticsolution]

Hi Walgekaaren,



W: I dont deny the 10 commandments, or Jesus, I am following them by loving each person as I love myself, I just am not so misguided to say everything into nice in words than the reality is otherwise or always quote the bible, if there are other books people might have read more than the bible. I am just accepting the fact that all people arent Christian or even reading the bible. If I quote Kierkegaard then to show that I have found the Christian truth in it. Like I see the same thing in Nietzsches works. I see Jesus everythere. In every person. But I dont need to be a hippy in words and say "I love you" all the time, or use such kind of language as if I were to use that phrase. That's why I wont accept the quote from Aurelius.

AS: I am sorry if I hit a nerve with you...my intent was to have a discussion about the man made institution of "Christianity" vs. God. I think Christians have a tendency to think Church is God....and therefore they blindly follow the word of man...meaning they follow a man made idea of what the scriptures mean instead of thinking for themselves about what God means. Does that make sense?

Just because you have "found" truth in something...doesn't mean that the next person has found the same "truth." It also doesn't mean that your "truth" is the ultimate truth as we all can be mistaken. So when you make a judgement like this:

" You're asking me of speaking bad for no reason; without pointing out the reason to blame them, just because I judge morality."

I believe you are mistaken. It is impossible to know what is in the heart of another. That is not your job. That is God's job. You can follow your own path....and refuse to walk a path you think immoral...but to judge others for walking their own path is akin to believing you are God or worse...listening to what the church tells you God means.

My point is, Jesus was God. As God he was able to make that judgment. You are not God...and as a human you have no such concept. So to err by way of judgment is to harm another. Do you see what I am saying? You are a child of God....other people are also children of God. He who is with sin cast the first stone. Maybe you can cast the stone inward at yourself....but never outward as it would be an epistemological mistake. Judge not lest ye be judged.

As far as the Aurelius quote, I think you are reading it wrong. It is not a statement of judgement but of fact. The only reason we feel harmed by another is because of our judgement. If we are able to remove that....i.e. turn the other cheek...then in a stoic way...literally, we can't 'feel' we've be harmed. The pain can't exist if we think it a pleasure...can it? Pain only hurts because we judge the pain as harmful to us. You are mistaking this quote by thinking it means to judge the man who is harming us. This is not what it is saying....it is removing the other individual from the equation and simply going inward in self. It talks about our inner strength. How to deal with pain. To me it is the same thing as saying:

You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.' But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.
—Matthew 5:38-42,


There is an inner strength in this passage that has nothing to do with aggressive behavior. It is talking about being above aggression. I think Christians have a tendency to want to fight on Gods behalf....but there is a disconnect there when they judge another aggressor as evil. What makes one aggressive follower of God more righteous than another? Each fighter would say they have God on their side. And each fighter is a child of God. It doesn't make sense to me that God would want either to fight. As we are equal in his eyes.

Most people can't bare to think of such passiveness...or submission...feeling instead they should behave like Jesus and walk around casting out sin. But in my view of things...Jesus was God and therefore he was morally superior to behave like a God. You and I are but mere humans. Equally un-superior ...equally on our own path to find God. I can tell you what I believe and you can tell me what you believe...but we do not have the purity to condemn each other. The most we can do is to say, I think you are wrong because of ....such and such. Which is what I am doing. If you take my questioning you as if I am condemning you , I apologize. I am very blunt sometimes because I have trouble communicating complex ideas.

I would be very interested in discussing fear and trembling with you as I am interested in your interpretation as I think we are getting very different readings from the same book and I would like to understand you a little better.

[Walgekaaren]

To artisticsolution: I will post a new thread called "Judgement vs. Scorn" since this conversation is leading outside of the original topic.

[chaz wyman]

Hi Chaz,

As a man it might not have occurred to you that there is actually a very good reason why girls seem to think sexual promiscuity is bad, other than religious reasons that is. I believe part of the reason is that we really don't get all that sexually aroused until later in life. Whereas men are pretty much good to go at any age. The only thing that keeps it in your pants is the fact that we say no.

Women don't get sexually aroused until later in life??? Hahahahahahaha. This is NOT my experience. Not at all!
The real difference is that men's arousal is constant and usually reliable; with women it is cyclical. This may do more to explain the difference.
But also there is the issue of penetrator and penetrated. That is why I said earlier that women/girls have something to protect, boys don't (though the obvious exception is not ignored).

What was really interesting is when I got into my 30's and actually started to enjoy sex for the pure pleasure of sex.

Late developer!
My first girlfriend at 16 was well ahead of me in sexual desire, and made all the running, whilst I was taking it step by step to respect her, she wanted to go far more quickly.


Anyway, I don't think you can understand unless you are a girl.

Urumph! I think you are speaking too subjectively for me to take this seriously.
But thanks for the personal reflexion. Maybe you should talk to more girls?

[artisticsolution]

C:Women don't get sexually aroused until later in life??? Hahahahahahaha. This is NOT my experience. Not at all!
The real difference is that men's arousal is constant and usually reliable; with women it is cyclical. This may do more to explain the difference.

AS:No...women do get sexually aroused...but it not the type of arousal that is only sexual. A young woman is more about having the guy lust after her than getting off...although she can cum and it's nice....it's more about who she can make fall in love with her enough to give her true devotion. It's about capturing the guy who puts her first. There is a very strong power a woman has at that time in her life and it is like a gift. A woman thinks more along the lines of who is worthy enough for that gift. Whereas a woman in her sexual prime starts thinking about men in a lustful way....aside and apart from wanting a "soul mate" for lack of a better word. The are pretty much over performing a part in order to find love, be a mother and all the things young women think about, as by this time they have already had their babies and they are over the power trip as the new young breed is replacing them in that arena. The sex becomes pleasurable in a different way...a way that I imagine a man feels about sex.

C:Late developer!
My first girlfriend at 16 was well ahead of me in sexual desire, and made all the running, whilst I was taking it step by step to respect her, she wanted to go far more quickly.

AS: LOL what you don't know about women is alot. I too seemed way ahead of my older boyfriends in sexual desire. But it was for much different reasons. It was new and fresh and I wanted to just have fun testing how totally hot I could get a guy. It was about seeing the lust in his eyes for me...it was about seeing how much power I had over him. My orgasm was not my first priority...and even though I had no problem achieving them...they were second to the excitement of my power....for lack of a better word.

And it wasn't just me....most women I knew at that age shared a few of the same thoughts about sex...that made me feel they were doing the same thing....it was never put as bluntly as I am saying it now... cause most women either don't understand that is what they are doing or don't want to admit to it because it's not flattering nor is it the way to be seen as nice in societies eyes..but I happen to not care what society thinks...I am going to tell you and then I challenge everyone in this forum to start paying close attention to the group dynamic when around women.

C: Maybe you should talk to more girls?

AS: Yes...maybe you are right Chaz...because I am sure you know women alot better than I do.
Perhaps someday you'll tell me all about them.

[chaz wyman]

C:Women don't get sexually aroused until later in life??? Hahahahahahaha. This is NOT my experience. Not at all!
The real difference is that men's arousal is constant and usually reliable; with women it is cyclical. This may do more to explain the difference.

AS:No...women do get sexually aroused...but it not the type of arousal that is only sexual.

True for SOME women. This is also true for SOME men, including me.

A young woman is more about having the guy lust after her than getting off...although she can cum and it's nice....it's more about who she can make fall in love with her enough to give her true devotion. It's about capturing the guy who puts her first. There is a very strong power a woman has at that time in her life and it is like a gift. A woman thinks more along the lines of who is worthy enough for that gift. Whereas a woman in her sexual prime starts thinking about men in a lustful way....aside and apart from wanting a "soul mate" for lack of a better word. The are pretty much over performing a part in order to find love, be a mother and all the things young women think about, as by this time they have already had their babies and they are over the power trip as the new young breed is replacing them in that arena. The sex becomes pleasurable in a different way...a way that I imagine a man feels about sex.

C:Late developer!
My first girlfriend at 16 was well ahead of me in sexual desire, and made all the running, whilst I was taking it step by step to respect her, she wanted to go far more quickly.

AS: LOL what you don't know about women is alot. I too seemed way ahead of my older boyfriends in sexual desire.

You misunderstand. I was being nice - she wanted to get fucked. I'd been sexually developed by 5 years by that time, and my sexual knowledge (thought theoretical and imaginary) was far beyond hers. The fact was that I was more interested in the full emotional experience. Sorry to smash your prejudice.


C: Maybe you should talk to more girls?

AS: Yes...maybe you are right Chaz...because I am sure you know women alot better than I do.

I know far more women sexually than you do. Think about it! All we have is your personal reflections. You are Naive.



Perhaps someday you'll tell me all about them.

Where would you like me to start?

[artisticsolution]

True for SOME women. This is also true for SOME men, including me.
[/color]

You misunderstand. I was being nice - she wanted to get fucked. I'd been sexually developed by 5 years by that time, and my sexual knowledge (thought theoretical and imaginary) was far beyond hers. The fact was that I was more interested in the full emotional experience. Sorry to smash your prejudice.
[/color]
I know far more women sexually than you do. Think about it! All we have is your personal reflections. You are Naive.

[/color]

How rare...a man who tries to turn the whole subject of women's sexuality into a conversation about his own. First of all....do you have a vagina for almost 50 years? Do you know what it's like to actually be a woman and experience menstruation, pregnancy. menopause, etc? Are you as emotionally developed? How would you know? Also, how would you know women don't lie to you? We have been know to be "Nice" too. Oh...and how would you even know you know far more women sexually than I do?

Sounds to me it's you who is the naive one.

[Arising_uk]

... Do you know what it's like to actually be a woman and experience menstruation, pregnancy. menopause, etc? Are you as emotionally developed? ...

Given that these appear to all be times when womens 'emotional development' goes out the window to the hormone, I'd think you were defeating your own question.

[Kayla]

Do you know what it's like to actually be a woman and experience menstruation, pregnancy. menopause, etc? Are you as emotionally developed? ...

Given that these appear to all be times when womens 'emotional development' goes out the window to the hormone, I'd think you were defeating your own question.[/quote]

given how much male emotions fluctuate across a day the emotional changes caused by the menstrual cycle are pretty minor

i have seen a man go from normal to batshit crazy berserk because his car got stratched for instance

female emotions do not fluctuate like that over trivial stuff

men who complain about 'that time of the month' are hypocritical idiots

[artisticsolution]

Given that these appear to all be times when womens 'emotional development' goes out the window to the hormone, I'd think you were defeating your own question.

Hi Arising,

Yes, I see what you mean but those were all separate questions in no particular order. But now that you brought it up...it is a fallacy of man's that Emotional outbursts during certain times of the month means that a woman's metal state is less than. I was talking about emotional IQ which I think Chaz is lacking. To me he seems stunted due to over confidence thinking he knows what it is to be a woman. Yes, we feel emotions stronger but you have no idea how deep they go or how accurate they are unless she is telling you the truth which women often omit. What you see on the surface may not be a reflection of what she is thinking. Most women talk very differently around men ( esp.the ones they have slept with) that they do around other women. I think Chaz thinks since he has sexually been with women he "knows" what they are thinking. I say he is fooling himself....not only that...I don't think his massive ego would ever allow him to admit I might be right.