# Virgin/Wh*re



## Pooh Bear

I was talking about this concept on another thread and I became curious as to how other women feel this has affected them. So tell me, have you noticed this concept in your own life? You don't have to get too personal but how would you say it has affected your sexuality and your relationships with men?


----------



## ConanHub

Thanks Pooh. I'm very curious about this, as if you couldn't tell from the other thread.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Cletus

Not sure I understand the question completely.


----------



## ConanHub

She is talking about what some refer to as the. Madonna/Wh0re complex. Men.will have sex and fun with a woman that isn't a virgin but won't commit to her and dump her in favor of a less experienced woman for marriage.

She is also addressing how this view point in society has impacted women.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## ConanHub

What happened with your GFs?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Holland

Can't say it has ever been an issue in my life, not even something my GFs have discussed. Never, not in my 20's and not in my 40's.


----------



## larry.gray

The flip side of this is there are plenty of examples of women who have fun, then when it's time to marry they marry a dude who's safe instead of what turns them on. 

Then the man gets to spend the rest of his marriage wondering what happened and why he can't get his wife to enjoy sex with him.


----------



## ConanHub

I wonder how often that happens and if we have any females here who would admit to that.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## *LittleDeer*

The virgin wh0re dichotomy is very real - just read the thread "Your opinion of Women who have sex on the first date"

There are deniers, however we don't live in a vacuum and the attitudes beliefs and values of those around us and society as a whole definitely impacts how we see ourselves. 

There is no doubt that many young people I spoke to at my workplace (I recently worked with at risk youth) struggled with this greatly. Having a normal healthy interest in sex was often viewed as slu*ty There was a definite push for the girls to find a particular boy and take their time. Any female who had more then one partner was viewed as a slu* by many - particularly the boys. 

This only serves to give young women mixed messages and cause confusion whilst also stunting their natural self discovery.


----------



## CaptainMyCaptain

intheory said:


> The first time I heard of this was in a high school literature class. I was having a conference with my teacher and she tried to explain Madonna/Wh0re as it was a theme in a book I was doing my final essay on.
> 
> In life; oh my God, it's_ everywhere._ Though it can be subtle.
> 
> ConanHub, now that you've had your awareness raised about it; you'll probably start to notice it.
> 
> The man who "scores" is a stud. The girl who does is, well to put it politely; not material suitable for a long term relationship.
> 
> Sorry to say, but I have very little, if any, sympathy for your friend who married this guy. He is a true victim in that relationship, based on what you have posted. There may be more to the story we don't know. But, it appears she married him for his money. She knew she wasn't turned on to him in a romantic way before they were married, didn't she? I doubt he married her with that knowledge. So, she made a decision to marry someone whom she wasn't attracted to sexually and now she cries over the decision she made. Sorry, my heart just doesn't bleed for her.
> 
> And larrygray, you are right. Some women do deliberately marry guys who are good providers; not guys they are attracted too. Yuck. I am thinking of one girl in particular who I knew. She basically broke down in tears with me one day. Having sex with her H almost made her skin crawl. He was a great provider. She had a brand new house, new car, lots of new clothes.
> 
> Only met him once. He was a nice-looking, polite guy in great shape. But not her type at all. Felt bad for him as well.


----------



## Observer

Human nature predates modern times, I think people are so enthralled with gender equality they forget social norms have existed for thousands of years. We have parts of the world today that still operate on the premise women are to be kept under a mans thumb. I doubt things change completely...ever.

I think the whole notion is simplistic and their are other factors that get taken into account for consideration for marriage. If the girl had many partners but never cheated on anyone, and I felt she was trustworthy, then I would be very cool with it. At least she won't think she missed out on something down the road.


----------



## Jellybeans

Women are placed in little boxes. Don't be too this or too that...


----------



## koukisdad

Age is also a major factor , at age of 20-30 marrying means to a man attempt to build a nest having lovely creatures in it .
at age of 40-50 , when they become more independant ; if they suck all the happiness from his heart ; he will definetly choose a ***** next time ....


----------



## Jellybeans

intheory said:


> The man who "scores" is a stud. The girl who does is, well to put it politely; not material suitable for a long term relationship.


Yep. The double standard that never dies.




intheory said:


> Some women do deliberately marry guys who are good providers; not guys they are attracted too. Yuck. I am thinking of one girl in particular who I knew. She basically broke down in tears with me one day. Having sex with her H almost made her skin crawl. He was a great provider. She had a brand new house, new car, lots of new clothes.
> 
> Only met him once. He was a nice-looking, polite guy in great shape. But not her type at all. Felt bad for him as well.


Yeah, that is awful. Poor guy. Especially if he thinks she married him for love. I know some women do this and I think, whyyy would you marry someone you're not attracted to (but that's because I would never).


----------



## ConanHub

Did M/H complex ever affect you intheory?
_Posted via Mobile Device_

Or you JB?


----------



## SimplyAmorous

> *Larry.Gray said*: *The flip side of this is there are plenty of examples of women who have fun, then when it's time to marry they marry a dude who's safe instead of what turns them on.
> 
> Then the man gets to spend the rest of his marriage wondering what happened and why he can't get his wife to enjoy sex with him*.





intheory said:


> *And larrygray, you are right. Some women do deliberately marry guys who are good providers; not guys they are attracted too. Yuck. I am thinking of one girl in particular who I knew. She basically broke down in tears with me one day. Having sex with her H almost made her skin crawl. He was a great provider. She had a brand new house, new car, lots of new clothes.
> 
> Only met him once. He was a nice-looking, polite guy in great shape. But not her type at all. Felt bad for him as well.*


Playing off of these 2 posts...last year I sat in the living room of a friend who shared with me how she married the quote/unquote "SAFE guy"... he was committed, she knew he would make a good Father/ "security"... after she had her fill of the NON-committing jerks, and let downs...Oh they turned her on.. (I don't recall her saying this part, just that they always ended up being Jerks)..... 

She sat there stressing how she TRIED...she really TRIED TO MAKE IT WORK.... but it just "WASN'T THERE"... she wasn't happy, she had to get out....they had 3 kids together.... she resented sex with him, it was awful.....I met this guy quickly once but don't really know him...he lives in another state...

Her daughter & mine play together....I know this little girl ADORES her Dad ..misses him terribly, when she 1st started coming over , I seen her cry how she wanted her parents to get back together....very sad.. 

So these things DO happen.. This woman is married for the 3rd time now.. they've had their issues too, imagine this one.. she married more of an Alpha type, so it seems to me (tattoos & all)...but he's LOW DRIVE ..so the attractive was there but he wasn't putting out ! go figure !


----------



## larry.gray

Jim Jefferies On ****s Vs Studs Debate


----------



## *LittleDeer*

larry.gray said:


> Jefferies On ****s Vs Studs Debate[/url]


I'm sorry I clicked on that link. I think it's easy to get a laugh at other peoples expense. Men have been doing it to women for ever.


----------



## Cletus

Madonna/***** is something I've heard discussed plenty on forums like this but have never personally encountered among any of my friends, acquaintances, or family. 

No doubt it really exists, but to be honest, it seems to be one of those catch-all amateur diagnoses that people like to throw around after reading two paragraphs about someone's history.

I married a near-virgin <snicker> whom I very much wish had been a little bit more of the alternative.


----------



## Jellybeans

ConanHub said:


> Did M/H complex ever affect you intheory?
> 
> Or you JB?


I dated a guy who made me feel bad for my sexuality. He did not like when I initiated and said something along the lines that I should not be aggressive or have as high of a drive since I was a woman, etc.

We were not sexually compatible as it turns out so it was best we ended. But at the time, I did really find myself checking myself so as not to appear too eager for sex with him/or wanting to make out with him because I know he felt it was not ladylike/proper/good of me. I wondered if something was wrong with me based on what he was saying. So glad it didn't work out. I never want to be with a man who makes me feel bad for wanting to have sex.


----------



## ConanHub

WOW! Lila, that guy was a cheater though. I wonder how many men who treat women like the M/H are really all there to begin with?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## ConanHub

I am honestly considering ranking M/H up there with R/J as a mental disorder. I think Cletus has a good point about M/H maybe being a junk drawer for several attitudes towards women and sex.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## larry.gray

ConanHub said:


> I am honestly considering ranking M/H up there with R/J as a mental disorder. I think Cletus has a good point about M/H maybe being a junk drawer for several attitudes towards women and sex.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I'd disagree about it being a mental disorder. I think it's the extreme example of a slvt shaming during childhood. It's beaten into some kids heads that sex is evil, and in particular, women who enjoy it are evil.

End the slvt shaming attitude, and the M/H incidence goes away.


----------



## Cletus

Jellybeans said:


> Women are placed in little boxes. Don't be too this or too that...


The two posts you've made on this topic paint a world that is very different from the one in which I live. Whereabouts geographically are you located?

I'm a Left Coaster from a progressive part of the state lampooned in Portlandia, a completely over-the-top representation of what really is a liberal bastion. Perhaps this has something to do with the fact that these gender issues are not as stark here. I work in engineering. Our group has four women - one with multiple masters degrees, two others respected professionals. No one pays even the slightest attention to their gender in what is still a predominantly male career. 

My 20-something children have female friends - one a budding economist, another a geologist. Neither seems to feel too restricted in their career choice, behavior, dress, or lifestyle. None seem to be operating under any kind of restriction on what they do or with whom they do it. Gender just doesn't seem to be a cause of much angst.

Perhaps it's not the same everywhere else, but I have never once heard my daughter complain that her internal genitalia have cost her anything in life whatsoever.


----------



## larry.gray

Lila said:


> That's an awesome question CH.
> 
> Note: I should have disclosed that I went to a University in the heart of the bible belt. I wonder if one's background/upbringing plays a role in the M/H?


Absofreakinglutely. Kids that are told that sex is bad, and women who like sex are evil are what is behind the whole M/H mindset.


----------



## Cletus

Lila said:


> That's an awesome question CH.
> 
> Note: I should have disclosed that I went to a University in the heart of the bible belt. I wonder if one's background/upbringing plays a role in the M/H?


Looks like you beat me to it.


----------



## larry.gray

I'm 30 miles to your South Cletus. Same profession... my kids are a few years younger. 

My take on this would be the same.

The impacts of the M/H syndrome are related to my generation, not my kids. I honestly don't know dudes who have an issue with it. At least not that I've heard. What I see the M/H syndrome manifested as:

Women who do things in an affair that they'd never do with their husband. Things like their husband only gets PIV after the ring, but the OM not only gets a BJ, he gets the full finish the husband never got.

Women who marry the "safe" guy that doesn't excite them like the bad boys did.


----------



## Cletus

larry.gray said:


> Absofreakinglutely. Kids that are told that sex is bad, and women who like sex are evil are what is behind the whole M/H mindset.


Ah, yes, I always forget that I live in the least churched state in the union. Much of my family and most of our family friends are atheist or agnostic, so the women were never beaten with the **** stick.

Even my wife took a very pragmatic approach to sexuality with my daughter after realizing the struggles it caused us. I bought my daughter her first box of condoms, just in case.


----------



## Jellybeans

Cletus said:


> The two posts you've made on this topic paint a world that is very different from the one in which I live. Whereabouts geographically are you located?


I'm on the east coast in the liberal land of Wash, DC. 

I find it odd that you say you live in a "very different world." Women are constantly objectified/sexualized in society. This is the world we live in. There is absolutely a double standard about boys being boys but girls doing the same are thought to be "trashy." I find it odd if you have never experienced this in your life because it's pretty universal. Look at the "What do you think a bout a woman who has sex on the first date?" thread. You would hardly ever see a thread titled "What do you think about men who have sex on the first date?" 



Cletus said:


> Perhaps it's not the same everywhere else, but I have never once heard my daughter complain that her internal genitalia have cost her anything in life whatsoever.


I made no reference to this in my post so I'm not sure what you're saying that about.


----------



## Cletus

larry.gray said:


> Women who marry the "safe" guy that doesn't excite them like the bad boys did.


I'll never be completely sure, but I think I might be one of those safe choices.


----------



## Jellybeans

Oh and that guy I wrote about that I dated was from up north in Pennsylvania.


----------



## ConanHub

Okay. Behavioral disorder. It is definitely a disorder of some kind.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Jellybeans

I don't know if I'd say it's a behavioral disorder but it is definitely WEIRD.

Wasn't there a thing about Elvis not wanting to have sex with his wife after she had their baby because he didn't see her as "pure" anymore? This could be myth, but it's along this thread subject's line.


----------



## ConanHub

Jellybeans said:


> Oh and that guy I wrote about that I dated was from up north in Pennsylvania.


I hope he is sexually frustrated. Passing up a sexual woman because she is sexual should land jail time. &#55357;&#56841;
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Jellybeans

Right?! That's what I said. LOL. 

It did make me realize I do not want that kind of partner, though. I want someone who wants to have a mutually satisfying sex life, not one where I'm shamed into feeling bad for wanting sex with them. No, no, no!


----------



## larry.gray

Cletus said:


> Ah, yes, I always forget that I live in the least churched state in the union. Much of my family and most of our family friends are atheist or agnostic, so the women were never beaten with the **** stick.


I think it takes at least one more generation to kill beyond walking away from conservative religion.

My MIL is agnostic, never went to church after she left home. Yet she pounds slvt shaming. Did a big number on my wife. My wife held those views until she hit her sexual prime. 

The contrast was stark. My wife was terrified by the prospect of our daughters finding out about her past, in particular what we did together prior to marriage. "What would they think of me?" It led to guilt about sex.

Now she's barring everything, and telling them that it's not anything to be ashamed about. She's putting the money where her mouth is in terms of wanting to prove to them that there is no shame in it.


----------



## Cletus

Jellybeans said:


> I'm on the east coast in the liberal land of Wash, DC.
> 
> I find it odd that you say you live in a "very different world."
> Women are constantly objectified/sexualized in society.


So are men. We live in a highly sexualized society. That you see more examples of it with women speaks more to me about that target demographic than about the women being objectified.



> This is the world we live in. There is absolutely a double standard about boys being boys but girls doing the same are thought to be "trashy." I find it odd if you have never experienced this in your life because it's pretty universal.


What can I say? Certainly I'm aware of it, but try as hard as I might, I cannot think of a single girl I knew growing up who was labeled a slvt for being too sexual. Stupid, maybe, for making poor choices and risking pregnancy, but not slvtty. I got a little bit of a slvt reputation by virtue of my idiot brother broadcasting my midnight dalliances with my high school girlfriend. 

I have only occasionally seen the double standard acted out in any meaningful way in real life. Guess I'm just lucky. 



> Look at the "What do you think a bout a woman who has sex on the first date?" thread.


Sorry, I'm not reading that thread because the question doesn't interest me. 

Why am I getting a hostile vibe here?


----------



## larry.gray

Cletus said:


> Why am I getting a hostile vibe here?


Outies are bad, MMMkay?


----------



## Rowan

Cletus said:


> Why am I getting a hostile vibe here?


I'm not sure it's hostility, exactly, but I think your posts seem to be being interpreted as you not believing that slvt-shaming is a real thing. Many people become defensive when their reality - the validity of their personal experiences - is called into question. That's not a gender thing, it's a human nature thing.

If your area has evolved past the point that slvt-shaming is an issue, that's a great thing. Many people, however, do still experience it. 

Me, personally? Well, I was "slvtty" in high school for having a very active and adventurous sexual relationship with my boyfriend. Now that I'm 38 and divorced from that same man, I'm not slvtty _enough_, because he remains my only previous sexual partner. Now in the dating world, I'm viewed as either an asexual freak (not enough of a past) or a high-value target (near-virgin who must be gagging for it and needs to get laid), depending on the guy. Wanna freak a dude out? Be honest, with a man you _didn't_ find through Christian Mingle, that at 38 years of age, your "number" is one.

:slap:


----------



## ConanHub

Cool Rowan. Not the divorce, but the other insights.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Cletus

Rowan said:


> I'm not sure it's hostility, exactly, but I think your posts seem to be being interpreted as you not believing that slvt-shaming is a real thing. Many people become defensive when their reality - the validity of their personal experiences - is called into question. That's not a gender thing, it's a human nature thing.


Except I'm not calling anyone's reality into question, simply observing that mine is different. Nor do I feel any need to impose my reality on anyone else. This topic has to be real given the amount of ink expended in its discussion, but it is also not necessarily universal. 



> If your area has evolved past the point that slvt-shaming is an issue, that's a great thing. Many people, however, do still experience it.


That's a pretty value-laden statement that I wouldn't make. Let's just say that this problem might be less prevalent here than elsewhere. It's also entirely possible that I just completely fail to notice it. 

However, the original comment that got me in the discussion was 

"Women are placed in little boxes. Don't be too this or too that..."

Unless I'm completely clueless, that is not the zeitgeist of the 5000 or so square miles in which the majority of my life has been conducted. YMMV.


----------



## Jellybeans

Cletus said:


> Why am I getting a hostile vibe here?


I'm not sure because my post was not meant to be that way.



Rowan said:


> I'm not sure it's hostility, exactly, but I think your posts seem to be being interpreted as you not believing that slvt-shaming is a real thing.
> 
> If your area has evolved past the point that slvt-shaming is an issue, that's a great thing. Many people, however, do still experience it.


:iagree:



Cletus said:


> However, the original comment that got me in the discussion was
> 
> "Women are placed in little boxes. Don't be too this or too that..."
> 
> Unless I'm completely clueless, that is not the zeitgeist of the 5000 or so square miles in which the majority of my life has been conducted. YMMV.


That's cool. You are saying you have had a different experience, which I respect. It has not been my experience though. PoohBear's thread is asking women in particular, in the ladies lounge, what their experiences have been with it and how it as affected them. So that's what I am posting, as a woman.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Lila said:


> Seriously though.....My last college roommate dated a guy like the one described in the OP. From what I saw and heard, they were very well matched. Alike in many ways - both career driven, enjoyed travelling, shared common interests, and by her account, sexually adventurous. They dated about 18 months or so and we all thought they would get married and live happily ever after. But when it came decision time, he elected to settle down with the virginal bride.
> 
> My roommate was devastated and very angry. *What made it worse was that although he chose to marry "the Virgin", he was still trying to keep roommate on the side. He had this crazy idea that he could successfully live two lives. One with his "good" wife and babies in the suburbs and another with his "vixen" partying it up at bars/clubs with his friends.
> 
> Funny enough I had known virginal bride for years and learned who her husband was at her BABY shower. Talk about awkward. *
> 
> Anyways, my roommate eventually met and fell in love with the guy she's married to today (14 years and counting).
> 
> *Last I heard, virginal bride is still married to do*che bag but he's a serial cheater. She refuses to accept that he'll never change. *{sigh}


This is precisely WHY a girl who cares about such things SHOULD NOT BE matched or even consider a philandering man.. what you say doesn't surprise me at all...and If that girl was MY friend, I would have been all over her to NOT get together with do*uchbag .


----------



## ConanHub

One interesting point. I was basically a man slvt growing up. I got looks of wonder and admiration, as well as many surprised comments, questions and pleas for advice, from men.

The vast majority of women did not seem at all bothered with me and many seemed to be competing. I have hooked up with my female counterparts on many occasions and had nothing but fun. Several of them were even willing to settle down and make an honest man of me.

I wonder how other women looked at my counterparts? My friends didn't look down on me or the women I was with. Quite the opposite actually.

Do women promote M/H?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Jellybeans

ConanHub said:


> Several of them were even willing to settle down and make an honest man of me.


Cute.


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening all (boy this thread moves fast)

I dated a woman who was a self-proclaimed slvt. It was great and I would definitely considered a long term relationship / marriage if it were not for other incompatibilities (she wanted a white picket-fence, 2 kids and a dog..., that wasn't the life I wanted). I have absolutely no negative feelings about women who are very sexual - though I know that there are people who do.

I think there is a similar dichotomy with how men are viewed (at least as evidenced by Hollywood): There is the rough / tough / rebel / strong / sexy / self-reliant guy. Then there is the nice supportive (and usually presented as week) guy. This choice seems to be the topic of 90% of romance stories. 

From what I have seen, there is no correlation between being "strong" and being "nice".


----------



## Jellybeans

Great post, Richard. 



richardsharpe said:


> I dated a woman who was a self-proclaimed slvt. It was great and I would definitely considered a long term relationship / marriage if it were not for other incompatibilities* (she wanted a white picket-fence, 2 kids and a dog..., that wasn't the life I wanted).*


:rofl: Love this.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

> Originally Posted by *richardsharpe*
> I dated a woman who was a self-proclaimed slvt. It was great and I would definitely considered a long term relationship / marriage *if it were not for other incompatibilities (she wanted a white picket-fence, 2 kids and a dog..., that wasn't the life I wanted)*.


I wanted at the very least 3 children...(if one wasn't a girl, we'd keep going), a dog, didn't care about the white picket fence but the vision was in the country with some land.....and lots of romance. I was so demanding !!! He was up for it all... I knew I'd never find another like him...



ConanHub said:


> *One interesting point. I was basically a man slvt growing up. I got looks of wonder and admiration, as well as many surprised comments, questions and pleas for advice, from men.
> 
> The vast majority of women did not seem at all bothered with me and many seemed to be competing. I have hooked up with my female counterparts on many occasions and had nothing but fun. Several of them were even willing to settle down and make an honest man of me.
> 
> I wonder how other women looked at my counterparts? My friends didn't look down on me or the women I was with. Quite the opposite actually.*
> 
> *Do women promote M/H?*
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


*Your experience is WHY women will always always always go after STUDS*....no matter how many women they bed...

I have a contrasting viewpoint on this, having not snagged the STUD....This is something I used to THINK.. and it doesn't sound so nice of me in regards to my Husband... but yet ....it's because I am so aware of how this plays out in reality with women & men... 

When a woman manages to catch the ALPHA male, the top dog.... why wouldn't she feel the most prized woman alive ??? She was able to do what no other women before her could Do.. tame the Bad Boy..... 

Ya see...* all these women KNEW you had options galore*..yet none had what it took to reach deeply into your heart & grab you... that special woman who turned your world upside down, you suddenly wanted to be serious & set up house with....

My LORD.. what does SHE have that no one else had??... ... Wouldn't this make anyone feel like a QUEEN of sorts....after all she managed to TAME the guy who had women crawling all over him, in their beds in the 1st 12 hrs..and he's willing to give all that up *FOR HER* ?

Thinking of George Clooney's new wife here..Many were asking -what does SHE HAVE !







..How did SHE DO IT !??

You know something...Knowing my H is tipped Beta, wasn't sought out by women....it lowers his attraction bar hugely of course...with that train of thought...it follows he was nothing special ...and ya know how it goes, LIKE attracts LIKE.. so basically I am nothing special either.. (looking through the eyes of others)....

Then I've entertained...he probably just asked me out cause I was "friendly".. I mean he seemed CRAZY about me but I guess I always looked at him *as a little more desperate* ... he didn't have options [email protected]#... knowing how he was dumped 2 times before me.. . he was just the shy guy none of the girls noticed.. 

For yrs in the back of my mind I thought to myself, well.. if he didn't find me, he probably would've ended up with a friend of a friend who had a big crush on him...

I said this to him one day -just joking around...if we didn't meet, he would have just ended up with Ann....and he's like "OH No.. that would have never happened"....then he went on...had he not met me, he doubts he would have married at all.. going on how particular he was..he never thought he'd meet anyone, it had to be a "sweeping off his feet" thing or he'd just stay single.. .. I have to say, it was ONLY because of that conversation ...it kinda set him in a new light for me.. even if he WASN'T sought after by other women.. 

And this is ALL because -what seems to FEED many of our egos in this world really is...that OTHERS ARE ATTRACTED to what we have... that snagging of *the Stud* everyone WANTS/ lusts after....Those women , or MEN, are always looked upon with Envy by others..... that's just the way it is.. at least in Hollywood, huh!


----------



## ConanHub

I wasn't even grown up enough to know what was going on. Only in retrospect am I getting a clue as to what happened. I was actually offended back then when one of my friends thought I was a womanizer. &#55357;&#56841;

Still wondering if women use M/H verbage on each other?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## DanaS

Rowan said:


> I'm not sure it's hostility, exactly, but I think your posts seem to be being interpreted as you not believing that slvt-shaming is a real thing. Many people become defensive when their reality - the validity of their personal experiences - is called into question. That's not a gender thing, it's a human nature thing.
> 
> If your area has evolved past the point that slvt-shaming is an issue, that's a great thing. Many people, however, do still experience it.
> 
> Me, personally? Well, I was "slvtty" in high school for having a very active and adventurous sexual relationship with my boyfriend. Now that I'm 38 and divorced from that same man, I'm not slvtty _enough_, because he remains my only previous sexual partner. Now in the dating world, I'm viewed as either an asexual freak (not enough of a past) or a high-value target (near-virgin who must be gagging for it and needs to get laid), depending on the guy. Wanna freak a dude out? Be honest, with a man you _didn't_ find through Christian Mingle, that at 38 years of age, your "number" is one.
> 
> :slap:


I HATE how so many men do this! It's just like when women talk about how often they get sexually harassed whether it be at work or just out for a jog. Men constantly say things like "Well, I don't see it" or "You're making it up". I can tell you as a 44 year old woman all of it is EXTREMELY COMMON. For once when women talk about their experiences I really wish men would stop getting so defensive and acknowldge it, which from my experience most men simply won't do. 

I remember a few years ago a friend was heading to her house after work at 1 AM and stopped by the ATM to withdrawal some money, she ended up being attacked and her money stolen, when she called the police and told them what had happened the first thing the (male) cop asked was "What are you doing out so late?" WTF??? WHY THE F DOES IT EVEN MATTER??? I guarantee if she were a man she wouldn't have been asked that.

Sorry, but this is one of my biggest pet peeves from men. When women tell you about their experiences, LISTEN and BELIEVE! But honestly I think most men would sooner believe in extraterrestrial life before they believe women. UGHHHH


----------



## ConanHub

Well how about you Dana? M/H ever bite you?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## norajane

Plenty of girls in my high school were called sl*ts, both behind their backs and to their face. There was some of that in college, too, by the same guys who were having sex with those "sl*ts." It follows women into their 20's, too, where men will hunt for women to have sex with, and date only the ones they want relationships with without pushing for sex by x date.

TV is full of this sh*t, too. Rarely can a teen girl have sex on tv without some horrible consequence. The boys are given condoms.

It's everywhere and has been for decades.

I think younger people today are more into f*ck buddies and hook-ups than dating. I'm too old to know who they are marrying, whether it's the women they are having sex with, or someone else who has kept herself out of the hook up situations.


----------



## Cletus

DanaS said:


> I HATE how so many men do this! It's just like when women talk about how often they get sexually harassed whether it be at work or just out for a jog. Men constantly say things like "Well, I don't see it" or "You're making it up".


What would you have us say? No woman with whom I have a relationship at the level required to answer has ever mentioned that she's ever felt _personally_ discriminated against because of her gender.

That's not the same as saying it doesn't happen. One of my ex-girlfriends was raped, but I don't put that in the same category. I believe your story, and the story of others. But in my personal experience, and in the experience of the women with which I am surrounded, it is a rare occurrence. 

You're not required to believe me I suppose, but that would be something of a hypocritical position to take. If it's happening behind my back and the women in my life are silent about it, perhaps they should speak up if they want to raise my awareness.

I am not unsympathetic, but I cannot address or correct or sympathize with that which I cannot see in my daily life, as more than an abstract concept.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

DanaS said:


> I HATE how so many men do this! It's just like when women talk about how often they get sexually harassed whether it be at work or just out for a jog. Men constantly say things like "Well, I don't see it" or "You're making it up". I can tell you as a 44 year old woman all of it is EXTREMELY COMMON. For once when women talk about their experiences I really wish men would stop getting so defensive and acknowldge it, which from my experience most men simply won't do.
> 
> *I remember a few years ago a friend was heading to her house after work at 1 AM and stopped by the ATM to withdrawal some money, she ended up being attacked and her money stolen, when she called the police and told them what had happened the first thing the (male) cop asked was "What are you doing out so late?" WTF??? WHY THE F DOES IT EVEN MATTER??? I guarantee if she were a man she wouldn't have been asked that.*
> 
> Sorry, but this is one of my biggest pet peeves from men. When women tell you about their experiences, LISTEN and BELIEVE! But honestly I think most men would sooner believe in extraterrestrial life before they believe women. UGHHHH


Although the cop didn't need to say that.. though I've noticed with cops, they always seem to ask WHY for everything.. 

I am probably the type of woman you would not like... I wouldn't think it was safe to go out alone after dark ...to an ATM.. I would advise against that at all costs to a friend or my daughter or my Mother, etc..... I'm sorry.. 

I had a GF get kinda ticked at me one day for suggesting she might get hurt going alone to bars.. she has a habit of drinking a little too much.. I guess to each their own.. If I think something is not wise, I tend to speak it in some fashion.. that gets judgement too..


----------



## staarz21

Cletus said:


> ...
> 
> but try as hard as I might, I cannot think of a single girl I knew growing up who was labeled a slvt for being too sexual. *Stupid, maybe, for making poor choices and risking pregnancy, but not slvtty.*


I'm genuinely curious, were the guys considered stupid for making poor choices and risking pregnancy?


----------



## ConanHub

staarz21 said:


> I'm genuinely curious, were the guys considered stupid for making poor choices and risking pregnancy?


Absolutely!
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Anonymous07

intheory said:


> The man who "scores" is a stud. The girl who does is, well to put it politely; not material suitable for a long term relationship.


:iagree: I see that kind of thinking a lot, but don't agree with it myself.

For my own beliefs, I view sex as something special, so it doesn't matter if it's a man or woman, I don't think they should be sleeping around. I guess you can say I view both men and women who sleep around as a "slvt". I waited to have sex and I am happy I did so. When I hear of a guy who has had some large number of partners, I get turned off because our views on sex do not match at all. My husband did sleep with someone before me, but they were in a long term relationship, so I was okay with that vs a one night stand. 

People should be with those who have similar views/beliefs. If you're okay with one night stands/multiple partners, then you should be with someone who believes the same. My husband and I view sex the same. I couldn't be with someone who viewed sex in a much different manner.


----------



## that.girl

Pooh Bear said:


> I was talking about this concept on another thread and I became curious as to how other women feel this has affected them. So tell me, have you noticed this concept in your own life? You don't have to get too personal but how would you say it has affected your sexuality and your relationships with men?


My XH pursued women he felt would be sexually adventurous, until he met me. He married me, knowing i was sexually tamer than he would like, because he wanted a stable woman to take care of him. He then spent many years pushing me to behave more like a porn star in the bedroom. 

I spent most of my marriage feeling sexually inadequate. I felt obligated to push outside of my comfort zone to make him happy, and it caused me to resent sex, and resent him.


----------



## Cletus

staarz21 said:


> I'm genuinely curious, were the guys considered stupid for making poor choices and risking pregnancy?


Good question. I'm the only guy for sure that I know who was having sex (contrary to stereotypes, sexual conquests were not locker room conversation in my world), and I was being careful. 

Although we did have one scare, and I felt pretty stupid.


----------



## Jellybeans

SimplyAmorous said:


> then he went on...*had he not met me, he doubts he would have married at all.. *going on how particular he was..*he never thought he'd meet anyone, it had to be a "sweeping off his feet" thing or he'd just stay single..* .. I have to say, it was ONLY because of that conversation ...it kinda set him in a new light for me.


I think that is sweet, Simply.


----------



## ConanHub

SimplyAmorous said:


> I think it's for the best for many reasons, I look upon sexual views similar to religious beliefs...it seems to be a profound part of who we are, how we express ourselves, how we view LOVE.. these are NOT little things...
> 
> Although people can change, come to another place through experience...etc... I feel when they get together... they need to be of like mind in this. I personally could *not* be with anyone who felt I was _____ or _____ downplaying my strong feelings on these things... it would fundamentally pi** me off..


That was me and Mrs. Conan. We both had pasts that we didn't set out for. Once we found each other, sex became very special, exclusive and for life again. 

When we met we obviously didn't wait! LOL! She followed the same pattern and was in my bed less than 12 hours after we met but she was the first I really cared about in a long time. It was very much like a first time ever sexual experience. I actually shook like a leaf.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## DoF

I don't want to come off like women are some kind of material possession or anything, just a different point of view/perspective I guess.

When you purchase ANYTHING, do you want it to be new or used?

Hope you understand.


----------



## always_alone

DoF said:


> I don't want to come off like women are some kind of material possession or anything, just a different point of view/perspective I guess.
> 
> When you purchase ANYTHING, do you want it to be new or used?
> 
> Hope you understand.


Yes, that sums up my experience nicely: a trash bag waiting for disposal. Meanwhile, the dogs will piss on it.


----------



## Cletus

DoF said:


> I don't want to come off like women are some kind of material possession or anything, just a different point of view/perspective I guess.
> 
> When you purchase ANYTHING, do you want it to be new or used?
> 
> Hope you understand.


Mostly I want it to work. I assume that it at least passed the factory acceptance test.


----------



## Jellybeans

DoF said:


> I don't want to come off like women are some kind of material possession or anything, just a different point of view/perspective I guess.
> 
> When you purchase ANYTHING, do you want it to be new or used?
> 
> Hope you understand.


----------



## that.girl

DoF said:


> I don't want to come off like women are some kind of material possession or anything, just a different point of view/perspective I guess.
> 
> When you purchase ANYTHING, do you want it to be new or used?
> 
> Hope you understand.


If you want a sports car, would you purchase a minivan with a better reliability rating, then get upset because it's not as fast as a sports car?


----------



## Cletus

DoF said:


> I don't want to come off like women are some kind of material possession or anything, just a different point of view/perspective I guess.
> 
> When you purchase ANYTHING, do you want it to be new or used?
> 
> Hope you understand.


Then you'd better require the buyer to be a first-time owner too. No refunds, exchanges, trade-ins, or warranty service allowed.


----------



## DoF

LMAO

As I was writing my post, I was laughing so hard.....and knew it would ignite all kinds of funny replies.

:smthumbup:


----------



## DanaS

Cletus said:


> What would you have us say? No woman with whom I have a relationship at the level required to answer has ever mentioned that she's ever felt _personally_ discriminated against because of her gender.
> 
> That's not the same as saying it doesn't happen. One of my ex-girlfriends was raped, but I don't put that in the same category. I believe your story, and the story of others. But in my personal experience, and in the experience of the women with which I am surrounded, it is a rare occurrence.
> 
> You're not required to believe me I suppose, but that would be something of a hypocritical position to take. If it's happening behind my back and the women in my life are silent about it, perhaps they should speak up if they want to raise my awareness.
> 
> I am not unsympathetic, but I cannot address or correct or sympathize with that which I cannot see in my daily life, as more than an abstract concept.


Why does it matter? All you (and other men) have is anecdotal evidence. I'm not even talking about ****holes like the middle east either but in western countries, it's a fact that men beating their gfs/wives, raping women, killing them, sexually harassing them is at epidemic levels. Do you honestly think women would bring it up so much if it was rare? 

The simple fact is men are much to lazy and enjoy their privilege and the status quo that they don't even want to acknowledge it much less being pro-active in trying to stop it. Sometimes I wish men knew what it was like to be constantly sexually harassed and raped at the level women are. I know it sounds horrible but I swear it would be the only way men would ever start to give a ****! 

And before you say anything, even though it shouldn't have to be said, I know not ALL men do these things but the amount men do do it if it were a virus/infection we'd be setting up quarantine zones all over America.


----------



## DoF

that.girl said:


> If you want a sports car, would you purchase a minivan with a better reliability rating, then get upset because it's not as fast as a sports car?


Sweet heart, I'm a minivan man. I LOVE minivans and cannot live without one.

Yes, I would purchase a minivan over sports car ANY day of the week and twice on sunday.

Besides, many of today's minivans have 250-300HP.......they are as fast if not faster than the sports cars when I was young hehe

And the little secret, minivans are the best bang for the buck car in this world. If you consider how much materials you get for the money, it's insane deal. Heck, V6 Accord costs as much if not more than a Oddysey......and Oddy has SO many more seats, same engine and just so much more. 

I love minivans! Best Multipurpose vehicle on the planet IMO, and by FAR the best people mover.

The answer is no, I wouldn't expect it to be as fast as a sports car. That's not why I'm buying one.

And I wouldn't expect a ***** to NOT be one either.....


----------



## Jellybeans

DoF said:


> LMAO
> 
> As I was writing my post, I was laughing so hard.....and knew it would ignite all kinds of funny replies.
> 
> :smthumbup:


You win.


----------



## Cletus

DanaS said:


> And before you say anything...


Quite frankly, I'm now afraid to say anything.


----------



## Jellybeans

DanaS said:


> Sometimes I wish men knew what it was like to be constantly sexually harassed and raped at the level women are. I know it sounds horrible but I swear it would be the only way men would ever start to give a ****!


Yeah I think that men honestly never really know the lengths/ways we are objectified constantly unless they were women for a day. Seeing and feeling it through a woman's eyes is totally different. I'm not saying men don't understand/can't fathom it, but the experience, as a woman is totally different. We really do deal with it all the time. It's crazy.

I mean, even at night if I am walking alone outside, there is a fear that I need to be on watch for anyone around me because you just never know if you could be in harm's way as a woman. I don't think most men feel that way just doing day to day things. I won't even exercise in the woods/jog/run/walk because of that. No lie.


----------



## DoF

DanaS said:


> Why does it matter? All you (and other men) have is anecdotal evidence. I'm not even talking about ****holes like the middle east either but in western countries, it's a fact that men beating their gfs/wives, raping women, killing them, sexually harassing them is at epidemic levels. Do you honestly think women would bring it up so much if it was rare?


Actually, all of the above ONLY gets better. Farther into past you go, worst it was.....I guarantee that!

Any men putting a finger on a woman in a western country = nuts. You are just asking for it.



DanaS said:


> The simple fact is men are much to lazy and enjoy their privilege and the status quo that they don't even want to acknowledge it much less being pro-active in trying to stop it. Sometimes I wish men knew what it was like to be constantly sexually harassed and raped at the level women are. I know it sounds horrible but I swear it would be the only way men would ever start to give a ****!


You need to lay off the news, seriously.

Women are not being raped or assaulted at "epidemic" levels. Quite the opposite actually.

We are being abused in MANY other ways. Don't worry.

You believe in Karma? 

Also, it's not fair for you to generalize and blame "other men's mistreatment/history" on all men.

I'm a bit offended by that....



DanaS said:


> And before you say anything, even though it shouldn't have to be said, I know not ALL men do these things but the amount men do do it if it were a virus/infection we'd be setting up quarantine zones all over America.


You are SO far from reality, it's not even funny.


----------



## DoF

Jellybeans said:


> Yeah I think that men honestly never really know the lengths/ways we are objectified constantly unless they were women for a day. Seeing and feeling it through a woman's eyes is totally different. I'm not saying men don't understand/can't fathom it, but the experience, as a woman is totally different. We really do deal with it all the time. It's crazy.
> 
> I mean, even at night if I am walking alone outside, there is a fear that I need to be on watch for anyone around me because you just never know. I don't think most men feel that way just doing day to day things. I won't even exercise in the woods/jog/run/walk because of that. No lie.


I'm sorry you feel this way, but this is our society/media at work.

It's YOUR issue. 

If you think that men don't deal with this, you are very wrong. our entire social status is defined by physical presence/how strong/survival of the fittest.

And don't even say that Women don't support any of that......


----------



## Jellybeans

DoF said:


> I'm sorry you feel this way, but this is our society/media at work.
> 
> It's YOUR issue.


I strongly disagree with this. It's not a "media" thing. There is certain sh*t that women have deal with on different levels that men simply don't. The female experience a whole different ballgame than the man experience.


----------



## DoF

Jellybeans said:


> I strongly disagree with this. It's not a "media" thing. There is certain sh*t that women have deal with on different levels that men simply don't. The female experience a whole different ballgame than the man experience.


Sure, can't disagree there, but it depends on what it is exactly.

For example, if you get hit on too much. Don't wear yoga pants or lay off make up. 

If you feel threatened, take martial arts class/build strength......carry mace/weapon.

There is a solution to make your life easier on just about every end.

Ignoring idiots and not letting people get to you is probably the best of them all.


----------



## Dad&Hubby

SimplyAmorous said:


> Although the cop didn't need to say that.. though I've noticed with cops, they always seem to ask WHY for everything..
> 
> I am probably the type of woman you would not like... I wouldn't think it was safe to go out alone after dark ...to an ATM.. I would advise against that at all costs to a friend or my daughter or my Mother, etc..... I'm sorry..
> 
> I had a GF get kinda ticked at me one day for suggesting she might get hurt going alone to bars.. she has a habit of drinking a little too much.. I guess to each their own.. If I think something is not wise, I tend to speak it in some fashion.. that gets judgement too..


I know this is going to make me look bad, but oh well. I completely agree with this!!!

If my wife said to me at 1AM "Hey hon, I'm going to stop at the ATM on the way home"...I'd be like "The EFF YOU ARE!!!!"

This isn't victim blaming, it's a discussion of judgement.

Would you walk down the streets of Detroit at 2AM waving money around? 

The bottom line is there are predators in this world...Just like I wouldn't go on a Safari in Africa on bicycle while wearing a meat suit....I'm not going to go to an ATM at 1am. 

The cop asking "why" isn't really as bad as you think....frankly he was just stunned someone would choose to behavior in an irresponsible way. Just like if someone shot themselves because they were cleaning their gun with a round chambered and the safety intentionally turned off...the cop on that call would ask "why".


----------



## Marduk

Jellybeans said:


> I strongly disagree with this. It's not a "media" thing. There is certain sh*t that women have deal with on different levels that men simply don't. The female experience a whole different ballgame than the man experience.


There's more than enough pain to go around in this world.

You don't have to add to men's thinking that somehow subtracts from women's.

This isn't a ball game.

When humans are hurt, we all lose.


----------



## Anonymous07

DoF said:


> Sure, can't disagree there, but it depends on what it is exactly.
> 
> For example, if you get hit on too much. Don't wear yoga pants or lay off make up.
> 
> If you feel threatened, take martial arts class/build strength......carry mace/weapon.
> 
> There is a solution to make your life easier on just about every end.
> 
> Ignoring idiots and not letting people get to you is probably the best of them all.


So women should wear burkas because "guys will be guys" and can act like pigs? I do't think so and will have to disagree. 

I don't think you will ever get it as to what women go through. In your mind it's so "simple", but it's not. The reality for women is much different than how you view it.


----------



## Marduk

Anonymous07 said:


> So women should wear burkas because "guys will be guys" and can act like pigs? I do't think so and will have to disagree.
> 
> I don't think you will ever get it as to what women go through. In your mind it's so "simple", but it's not. The reality for women is much different than how you view it.


And so is the reality for men.

You have no monopoly on suffering.


----------



## Jellybeans

DoF said:


> Sure, can't disagree there, but it depends on what it is exactly.
> 
> For example, if you get hit on too much. Don't wear yoga pants or lay off make up.
> 
> If you feel threatened, take martial arts class/build strength......carry mace/weapon.
> 
> There is a solution to make your life easier on just about every end.
> 
> Ignoring idiots and not letting people get to you is probably the best of them all.


I don't really have much else to say regarding what I wrote but will say that you posted exactly the type of thing I thought you would, sarcastic smiley faces and all. 




marduk said:


> You don't have to add to men's thinking that somehow subtracts from women's.
> 
> This isn't a ball game.


That was not at all my intention in my post. I never said anything was a "game."


----------



## Cletus

Anonymous07 said:


> So women should wear burkas because "guys will be guys" and can act like pigs? I do't think so and will have to disagree.
> 
> I don't think you will ever get it as to what women go through. In your mind it's so "simple", but it's not. The reality for women is much different than how you view it.


I suppose you'd have to thank evolution for that one. Sexual dimorphism has its consequences. At least you're not a male praying mantis. 

I have to go to a strange city next week. You can bet I'll be very aware of my surroundings with all of my systems on full alert. It may not be in the same ballpark, but us men aren't completely unaware of how this feels, deep down in your gut.


----------



## Marduk

Jellybeans said:


> That was not at all my intention in my post. I never said anything was a "game."


Really? 

Are you not keeping score?



> There is certain sh*t that women have deal with on different levels that men simply don't. The female experience a whole different ballgame than the man experience.


I'm not denying your pain.

Just don't deny other people's pain just because they have an Y chromosome, either.


----------



## DanaS

Jellybeans said:


> Yeah I think that men honestly never really know the lengths/ways we are objectified constantly unless they were women for a day. Seeing and feeling it through a woman's eyes is totally different. I'm not saying men don't understand/can't fathom it, but the experience, as a woman is totally different. We really do deal with it all the time. It's crazy.
> 
> I mean, even at night if I am walking alone outside, there is a fear that I need to be on watch for anyone around me because you just never know if you could be in harm's way as a woman. I don't think most men feel that way just doing day to day things. I won't even exercise in the woods/jog/run/walk because of that. No lie.


Exactly. Just like when dealing with PMS/cramps guys love to joke about it and tell women they should just "suck it up" despite the fact we're BLEEDING FROM OUR VAGINA! If men bled from their penis every month there would be all kinds of dispensers on every corner for men. 

I have also noticed sympathy/empathy is just not something most men are capable of. If someone gets hurt or in an accident men are much more likely to laugh or call that person stupid than actually offer compassion. Now my husband doesn't at all act like this, but he's a guy that really doesn't like other men either so it works out. Nor does he use all the crude/down right sick language men love to use when talking about women.


----------



## Marduk

DanaS said:


> Exactly. Just like when dealing with PMS/cramps guys love to joke about it and tell women they should just "suck it up" despite the fact we're BLEEDING FROM OUR VAGINA! If men bled from their penis every month there would be all kinds of dispensers on every corner for men.
> 
> I have also noticed sympathy/empathy is just not something most men are capable of. If someone gets hurt or in an accident men are much more likely to laugh or call that person stupid than actually offer compassion. Now my husband doesn't at all act like this, but he's a guy that really doesn't like other men either so it works out. Nor does he use all the crude/down right sick language men love to use when talking about women.


Wow.


----------



## EleGirl

koukisdad said:


> Age is also a major factor , at age of 20-30 marrying means to a man attempt to build a nest having lovely creatures in it .
> at age of 40-50 , when they become more independant ; if they suck all the happiness from his heart ; he will definetly choose a ****** *next time ....


Nice way to demonstrate a this double standard. Calling women *****s is not cool. A woman who enjoys sex is not a *****. She's a woman who enjoys sex.


----------



## Cletus

marduk said:


> Just don't deny other people's pain just because they have an Y chromosome, either.


Excellent correction. I saw the original and was going to bust your chops.


----------



## Marduk

Cletus said:


> Excellent correction. I saw the original and was going to bust your chops.


Brain fart.

Boss walked into my office.

Who's a woman, btw.


----------



## DanaS

DoF said:


> Actually, all of the above ONLY gets better. Farther into past you go, worst it was.....I guarantee that!
> 
> Any men putting a finger on a woman in a western country = nuts. You are just asking for it.
> 
> 
> 
> You need to lay off the news, seriously.
> 
> Women are not being raped or assaulted at "epidemic" levels. Quite the opposite actually.
> 
> We are being abused in MANY other ways. Don't worry.
> 
> You believe in Karma?
> 
> Also, it's not fair for you to generalize and blame "other men's mistreatment/history" on all men.
> 
> I'm a bit offended by that....
> 
> 
> 
> You are SO far from reality, it's not even funny.


You can say whatever you want but that's simply not true. Look at this: https://rainn.org/statistics

The statistics are appalling. Not to mention most men that rape won't spend a day in jail or even if they do it's pathetic like 6 months to a year as opposed to what it should be like 20-life. 

Most of the male judges on the bench are sexist pigs that couldn't care less if women get justice or not, and they will happily defend other men from harsh sentences. 

It sure is funny how American men love to think they are so progressive and "enlightened" compared to men in other parts of the world but the truth is most mens mentalities are little better than the Taliban. 

Let me ask you this: If every man in America were given a device that allowed them to just point it at any woman they wanted, press one button and she'd do whatever they wanted for as long as they wanted no questions asked how many men do you think would happily use it time and time again? I'd estimate 80-90%. 

As I said, I'm 44 and can tell you that men are just as sick/pig headed today as they were back in the day.


----------



## Cletus

DanaS said:


> I have also noticed sympathy/empathy is just not something most men are capable of.


Not a fan of double standards? Then I submit you wouldn't have much liked the reaction you'd have received from the ladies on this forum if you'd been a man spouting off about women as you've done in this thread.


----------



## Marduk

DanaS said:


> It sure is funny how American men love to think they are so progressive and "enlightened" compared to men in other parts of the world but the truth is most mens mentalities are little better than the Taliban.
> 
> Let me ask you this: If every man in America were given a device that allowed them to just point it at any woman they wanted, press one button and she'd do whatever they wanted for as long as they wanted no questions asked how many men do you think would happily use it time and time again? I'd estimate 80-90%.
> 
> As I said, I'm 44 and can tell you that men are just as sick/pig headed today as they were back in the day.


You just crossed a line, lady, and I find your entire post deeply offensive and sexist.


----------



## Pooh Bear

intheory said:


> The first time I heard of this was in a high school literature class. I was having a conference with my teacher and she tried to explain Madonna/Wh0re as it was a theme in a book I was doing my final essay on.
> 
> In life; oh my God, it's_ everywhere._ Though it can be subtle.
> 
> ConanHub, now that you've had your awareness raised about it; you'll probably start to notice it.
> 
> The man who "scores" is a stud. The girl who does is, well to put it politely; not material suitable for a long term relationship.
> 
> 
> And larrygray, you are right. Some women do deliberately marry guys who are good providers; not guys they are attracted too. Yuck. I am thinking of one girl in particular who I knew. She basically broke down in tears with me one day. Having sex with her H almost made her skin crawl. He was a great provider. She had a brand new house, new car, lots of new clothes.
> 
> Only met him once. He was a nice-looking, polite guy in great shape. But not her type at all. Felt bad for him as well.


That makes me sad for them.


----------



## DoF

Anonymous07 said:


> So women should wear burkas because "guys will be guys" and can act like pigs? I do't think so and will have to disagree.


I never said that no, women should do whatever the hell they want



Anonymous07 said:


> I don't think you will ever get it as to what women go through. In your mind it's so "simple", but it's not. The reality for women is much different than how you view it.


I never said "simple" Nothing is easy.

I know it's not easy, but that goes for both sexes.


----------



## Jellybeans

marduk said:


> Really?
> 
> Are you not keeping score?


Huh? Score of what?


----------



## Pooh Bear

Lila said:


> I've never experienced this in my own life but I did see this happen to several of my college girlfriends. I don't necessarily think there was anything special about me compared to them (I did have my fair share of lovers) but I was never attracted to the type of guy who tends to suffer from M/W complex: 1) the ones with low self-esteem or have feelings of inadequacy or 2) the ones that are more concerned with what others think. I've always been attracted to men who march to the beat of their own drum and don't really care what others think, a.k.a The Honeybadger
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4r7wHMg5Yjg


But you've been aware of it, I'm sure. What have you thought about it? How have you responded overall to the idea that you might be called a sl*t or a wh*re? Were you aware of it and it has never mattered? Have you ever thought about that? I actually hadn't thought about how much I was shaped by it until Conan asked me about it. Then, I really got to thinking about what impact it has had in my life.


----------



## EleGirl

DoF said:


> I don't want to come off like women are some kind of material possession or anything, just a different point of view/perspective I guess.
> 
> When you purchase ANYTHING, do you want it to be new or used?
> 
> Hope you understand.


Here we go folks... the M/H attitude.

A woman who has sex is not used. Not any more used than a man who has sex.

The attitude is basically that a woman is a piece of meat that spoils if exposed to the elements (sex).


----------



## Pooh Bear

*Human nature predates modern times, I think people are so enthralled with gender equality they forget social norms have existed for thousands of years. *

Ever thought about how social norms were created and why they were created?


----------



## DoF

DanaS said:


> You can say whatever you want but that's simply not true. Look at this: https://rainn.org/statistics


You can make any statistic look skewed.

Do you have statistics from 1000 years ago or 100 years ago to compare to what I was saying.

How about this, how many of these victims CHOOSE to be around crappy people/bad environments? Cause I do see MANY women constantly go after "bad boys" and expecting prince charming.

If it walks/quacks like a duck, it's a duck.

Women have it better then EVER (any other time in the past)



DanaS said:


> The statistics are appalling. Not to mention most men that rape won't spend a day in jail or even if they do it's pathetic like 6 months to a year as opposed to what it should be like 20-life.


Statistic like there are meant to scare the CRAP out of you even more.

Justice system is AS unfair for women as it is for men. What can I say (I dont agree with it either).



DanaS said:


> Most of the male judges on the bench are sexist pigs that couldn't care less if women get justice or not, and they will happily defend other men from harsh sentences.


Not sure if that's true......



DanaS said:


> It sure is funny how American men love to think they are so progressive and "enlightened" compared to men in other parts of the world but the truth is most mens mentalities are little better than the Taliban.


First, please don't call me American man. I'm deeply offended....even though I'm more American than I am my country of origin.

Yes, men are ****ed up, but so are women. WE ARE ALL HUMAN.

Gender means NOTHING.



DanaS said:


> Let me ask you this: If every man in America were given a device that allowed them to just point it at any woman they wanted, press one button and she'd do whatever they wanted for as long as they wanted no questions asked how many men do you think would happily use it time and time again? I'd estimate 80-90%.
> 
> As I said, I'm 44 and can tell you that men are just as sick/pig headed today as they were back in the day.


Glad you brought this up, and I will take you up on it.

Yes, most men are filthy pigs that use that button.

Thing is, women HAVE some of these buttons ALREADY and legally use it on regular basis.

Would I use it? Hell no.

I think your opinion on men is rather offensive. Please don't generalize, there are good men out there.

Yes stupidity is rampant, but that applies to men as much as women.

Sorry but stupidity has no gender boundaries.


----------



## Cletus

Pooh Bear said:


> But you've been aware of it, I'm sure. What have you thought about it? How have you responded overall to the idea that you might be called a sl*t or a wh*re? Were you aware of it and it has never mattered? Have you ever thought about that? I actually hadn't thought about how much I was shaped by it until Conan asked me about it. Then, I really got to thinking about what impact it has had in my life.


Now that's a much more interesting question, to me. 

There's a certain breed of person south of the Mason Dixon line (mostly) who equate my religious views with baby eating, and they are very happy to share it. Their opinion has no bearing on how I see myself or live my life. 

If we can't teach everyone to not consider a sexually active unmarried a woman a sl*t, perhaps the next best thing is to make sure we teach the women to bloody well not care.


----------



## DoF

EleGirl said:


> Here we go folks... the M/H attitude.
> 
> A woman who has sex is not used. Not any more used than a man who has sex.


We are not talking men though. 

And what I said applies to men and women.

If you can have a guy that's a virgin or a guy that banged bunch of women, which one would you choose?



EleGirl said:


> The attitude is basically that a woman is a piece of meat that spoils if exposed to the elements (sex).


No, I thought I was very clear about my first paragraph. You ignored it.


----------



## DoF

Cletus said:


> Now that's a much more interesting question, to me.
> 
> There's a certain breed of person south of the Mason Dixon line (mostly) who equate my religious views with baby eating, and they are very happy to share it. Their opinion has no bearing on how I see myself or live my life.
> 
> If we can't teach everyone to not consider a sexually active unmarried a woman a sl*t, perhaps the next best thing is to make sure we teach the women to bloody well not care.


Yep, rule of thumb > who gives a **** what people think about you or what they call you.

What YOU believe is what really matters.

I call this "letting idiots underneath your skin and lowering YOURSELF to their standards".

With above, entire discussion/*****/**** argument wouldn't even exist.

It's simply fabricated by people that care WAY too much about idiots opinion.



Here is a great example:

My "friends" used to call me a "sucker", "***** wipped" amongst MANY other things because I wanted to go home to wife and young child over "handing out". At VERY young age there were few that took this seriously and actually completely neglected their love ones/child.

Me? Are you f'in kidding me? I dropped those "friends" pretty fast......

Another thing many women don't realize. MEN and our entire society consistently makes fun of male virgins (the opposite of what women deal with). That's right, if you don't have sex, you are a low life/loser etc.

You see, it's all the same crap just a different perspective.

Yeah, people are crappy, no news flash. Our entire Society is ass backwards.

Member the most "coolest"/popular people in school? Most were horrible in school/bad grades and even thugs. Meanwhile, nerds were the losers....you know? the guy that does great in school. Back in my country things weren't like this, if you sucked in school, your personality mattered NONE.....you were a loser.

Why do we drive on parkways and park in the driveways?


----------



## BradWesley

DanaS said:


> You can say whatever you want but that's simply not true. Look at this: https://rainn.org/statistics
> 
> The statistics are appalling. Not to mention most men that rape won't spend a day in jail or even if they do it's pathetic like 6 months to a year as opposed to what it should be like 20-life.
> 
> Most of the male judges on the bench are sexist pigs that couldn't care less if women get justice or not, and they will happily defend other men from harsh sentences.
> 
> It sure is funny how American men love to think they are so progressive and "enlightened" compared to men in other parts of the world but the truth is most mens mentalities are little better than the Taliban.
> 
> Let me ask you this: If every man in America were given a device that allowed them to just point it at any woman they wanted, press one button and she'd do whatever they wanted for as long as they wanted no questions asked how many men do you think would happily use it time and time again? I'd estimate 80-90%.
> 
> As I said, I'm 44 and can tell you that men are just as sick/pig headed today as they were back in the day.


Who pissed on your corn flakes this morning!

Sheesh.


----------



## Pooh Bear

ConanHub said:


> Okay. Behavioral disorder. It is definitely a disorder of some kind.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


No. It's not a disorder of any kind. I have a mental disorder and those are outside of a person's control. Attitudes about men and women are not outside of our control although we are exposed to them from birth. So a lot of it is subconcious.


----------



## EleGirl

This thread has jumped the tracks. It's about the M/H mind set and how it has affected women. Perhaps we should get back to that?

I believe that it's so engrained in people that most don't even realize that it drives their thoughts so often.

I know that a lot of women have this thing they do, it's a double check, on our actions. How will our actions be taken? Will be judged as a [email protected]/slvt? Women often dress in a way to down play their sexuality to make sure they are not judged to be the [email protected]

What amazes me is that men seem to prefer the Madonna type of woman to marry. But these sorts of women are generally very sexually inhibited. They have bought into the idea that sex is dirty, bad. only something that men want to use women for. These lessons do not turn off after marriage. So then the guy is upset because he married a woman who is not more adventurous sexually.


----------



## I Don't Know

I think there are plenty of women who would push that button as well. Look at how some women manipulate men with their looks. How many women cry their way out of traffic tickets? Get the shlub across the hall to carry the heavy boxes by batting her eyes at him? Hell I don't blame them. I'd do it too.


----------



## Marduk

Jellybeans said:


> Huh? Score of what?


You compared women's suffering to men, and said women's is on a whole different level, i.e. greater than men's. 

If that's not keeping score, I don't know what is.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Pooh Bear

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening all (boy this thread moves fast)
> 
> I dated a woman who was a self-proclaimed slvt. It was great and I would definitely considered a long term relationship / marriage if it were not for other incompatibilities (she wanted a white picket-fence, 2 kids and a dog..., that wasn't the life I wanted). I have absolutely no negative feelings about women who are very sexual - though I know that there are people who do.
> 
> I think there is a similar dichotomy with how men are viewed (at least as evidenced by Hollywood): There is the rough / tough / rebel / strong / sexy / self-reliant guy. Then there is the nice supportive (and usually presented as week) guy. This choice seems to be the topic of 90% of romance stories.
> 
> From what I have seen, there is no correlation between being "strong" and being "nice".


I agree. There are stereotypes for men too.


----------



## Jellybeans

EleGirl said:


> Women often dress in a way to down play their sexuality to make sure they are not judged to be the [email protected]


Like yoga pants = no good



DoF said:


> For example, if you get hit on too much. Don't wear yoga pants or lay off make up.





EleGirl said:


> This thread has jumped the tracks. *It's about the M/H mind set and how it has affected women. Perhaps we should get back to that?*


And more specifically, the thread was asking women how it has affected their lives and their relationships with men and to post their experiences and feelings on the subject.

But the implication by some is that the experiences women are posting about aren't really real and that they are wrong for saying they experienced these things and that their feelings aren't that. Their own experiences are all in their mind. 

But yeah, this thread got WAY off track.


----------



## larry.gray

staarz21 said:


> I'm genuinely curious, were the guys considered stupid for making poor choices and risking pregnancy?


Seriously?????? You don't think guys that foolishly knock up a chick are considered idiots by other guys? Among the bad boy felon crowd where there is zero penalty to knocking up a woman it's a badge of honor. Among the normal crowd it's a huge fear. 

A guy has more risk in this regard. A woman has choices. A guy gets to wait the the woman to make her choices.


----------



## Pooh Bear

ConanHub said:


> One interesting point. I was basically a man slvt growing up. I got looks of wonder and admiration, as well as many surprised comments, questions and pleas for advice, from men.
> 
> The vast majority of women did not seem at all bothered with me and many seemed to be competing. I have hooked up with my female counterparts on many occasions and had nothing but fun. Several of them were even willing to settle down and make an honest man of me.
> 
> I wonder how other women looked at my counterparts? My friends didn't look down on me or the women I was with. Quite the opposite actually.
> 
> Do women promote M/H?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


You ask very thought-provoking questions, Conan. And it sounds like you were the "stud" for a while. 

I think that many of us buy into these stereotypes at one point or another and many of us promote them. But it's not solely a problem of women, certainly.


----------



## Pooh Bear

*So are men. We live in a highly sexualized society. That you see more examples of it with women speaks more to me about that target demographic than about the women being objectified.*

Sorry, Cletus, not like women are objectified.

*I got a little bit of a slvt reputation by virtue of my idiot brother broadcasting my midnight dalliances with my high school girlfriend. 
*

Really? People looked down on you for having sex with your girlfriend?


----------



## Pooh Bear

*When a woman manages to catch the ALPHA male, the top dog.... why wouldn't she feel the most prized woman alive ??? She was able to do what no other women before her could Do.. tame the Bad Boy..... *

Right. This is a story we are fed from very young. Why wouldn't we live that out? And the story isn't true. Because you can't "tame" anybody. But if we don't value ourselves then we have to find that value in what a man can give us.


----------



## Pooh Bear

norajane said:


> Plenty of girls in my high school were called sl*ts, both behind their backs and to their face. There was some of that in college, too, by the same guys who were having sex with those "sl*ts." It follows women into their 20's, too, where men will hunt for women to have sex with, and date only the ones they want relationships with without pushing for sex by x date.
> 
> TV is full of this sh*t, too. Rarely can a teen girl have sex on tv without some horrible consequence. The boys are given condoms.
> 
> It's everywhere and has been for decades.
> 
> I think younger people today are more into f*ck buddies and hook-ups than dating. I'm too old to know who they are marrying, whether it's the women they are having sex with, or someone else who has kept herself out of the hook up situations.


Oh, and who is the first person to be killed in horror movies? Very often it is the sexual girl!


----------



## Cletus

I would like to take a moment to notice that a woman on this forum came out and gave the entire male gender both barrels in this discussion.

And not a single woman to this point has chimed in to upbraid her.


----------



## Pooh Bear

Cletus said:


> What would you have us say? No woman with whom I have a relationship at the level required to answer has ever mentioned that she's ever felt _personally_ discriminated against because of her gender.
> 
> That's not the same as saying it doesn't happen. One of my ex-girlfriends was raped, but I don't put that in the same category. I believe your story, and the story of others. But in my personal experience, and in the experience of the women with which I am surrounded, it is a rare occurrence.
> 
> You're not required to believe me I suppose, but that would be something of a hypocritical position to take. If it's happening behind my back and the women in my life are silent about it, perhaps they should speak up if they want to raise my awareness.
> 
> I am not unsympathetic, but I cannot address or correct or sympathize with that which I cannot see in my daily life, as more than an abstract concept.


I don't know the experience of being a black man. That doesn't mean racism doesn't exist. It means that I have to start listening to how another person experiences that inequality.


----------



## Pooh Bear

that.girl said:


> My XH pursued women he felt would be sexually adventurous, until he met me. He married me, knowing i was sexually tamer than he would like, because he wanted a stable woman to take care of him. He then spent many years pushing me to behave more like a porn star in the bedroom.
> 
> I spent most of my marriage feeling sexually inadequate. I felt obligated to push outside of my comfort zone to make him happy, and it caused me to resent sex, and resent him.


I'm sorry.


----------



## larry.gray

DanaS said:


> Why does it matter? All you (and other men) have is anecdotal evidence. I'm not even talking about ****holes like the middle east either but in western countries, it's a fact that men beating their gfs/wives, raping women, killing them, sexually harassing them is at epidemic levels. Do you honestly think women would bring it up so much if it was rare?


I clicked your profile, but you don't say where you live. From this attitude I must presume either you don't live in the US, or you live in one of the decaying urban hell-holes in the US like Detroit or St. Louis. Because if you live where most of the US population lives, that simply isn't true.

The crime rate in the US peaked in the 1980's. It started rising in the 1960's and it eclipsed the crime rate in the 1930. In the 1990's, it's been tanking. It is now the safest it has ever been at any point in US history.

Women don't worry about going out at any time of night around here. To an ATM, or anywhere else. There were TWO reported rapes in my county last year.... TWO.

And yes, I know that many rapes aren't reported. But with the changing attitude on reporting it, all of the PSAs, the vigorous investigation and prosecution of rape, the prohibitions on slvt shaming by defense attorneys, and the victim's advocates, I cannot believe it's reported at a lower rate than it was 30 years ago. 



DanaS said:


> The simple fact is men are much to lazy and enjoy their privilege and the status quo that they don't even want to acknowledge it much less being pro-active in trying to stop it.


What happened to you? Anger doesn't convince people. You really shouldn't insult people with a broad brush, it's a bad reflection on your character.



DanaS said:


> And before you say anything, even though it shouldn't have to be said, I know not ALL men do these things but the amount men do do it if it were a virus/infection we'd be setting up quarantine zones all over America.


Yeah, yeah, it's those other men. But you are painting us with a broad brush. 

Ever hear about the boy who cried wolf? It's a great parable. When confront actual sexism, people will believe you when it isn't the 1,437th time you've claimed it.


----------



## staarz21

larry.gray said:


> Seriously?????? You don't think guys that foolishly knock up a chick are considered idiots by other guys? Among the bad boy felon crowd where there is zero penalty to knocking up a woman it's a badge of honor. Among the normal crowd it's a huge fear.
> 
> A guy has more risk in this regard. A woman has choices. A guy gets to wait the the woman to make her choices.


I was asking Cletus if the boys were considered stupid in his area. He said that people where he is from didn't succumb to the madonna/wh8re thing. So, I was simply asking him about HIS experience. I was genuinely curious (as my post stated).

I never said anything about the general public. The early part of this thread had a part going about location and these issues while growing up.

Of course I know they are considered stupid. At least where I am from they are. No need to attack me over that. I am refusing to jump into this train wreck of an argument on which gender has it worse....


----------



## larry.gray

DanaS said:


> I have also noticed sympathy/empathy is just not something most men are capable of. If someone gets hurt or in an accident men are much more likely to laugh or call that person stupid than actually offer compassion.


Seriously, where the eff do you live?

I've never seen that... EVER. I'm the guy that stops at an accident and tends to the wounded. All I'm worried about is who's hurt and what help they need.


----------



## Pooh Bear

Jellybeans said:


> Yeah I think that men honestly never really know the lengths/ways we are objectified constantly unless they were women for a day. Seeing and feeling it through a woman's eyes is totally different. I'm not saying men don't understand/can't fathom it, but the experience, as a woman is totally different. We really do deal with it all the time. It's crazy.
> 
> I mean, even at night if I am walking alone outside, there is a fear that I need to be on watch for anyone around me because you just never know if you could be in harm's way as a woman. I don't think most men feel that way just doing day to day things. I won't even exercise in the woods/jog/run/walk because of that. No lie.


And then if you were to exercise in the woods and were raped or attacked you would inevitably be asked "what were doing in the woods alone?" I get trying to take precautions but the first question out of people's mouths should be why would anyone rape/attack someone. We don't ask people who are mugged why they were doing what they do.


----------



## Cletus

Pooh Bear said:


> I don't know the experience of being a black man. That doesn't mean racism doesn't exist. It means that I have to start listening to how another person experiences that inequality.


Sigh. Of course I know that. 

It also doesn't mean that a man in my home town experiences racism the same way or to the same degree that a man living in Mobile, AL might experience racism. 

Am I to substitute the opinions on this forum for the words right out of my wife's mouth for her experience of sexual discrimination? Why is it causing so many minds to be blown to say that the degree to which women have to put up with this varies depending on where you live?


----------



## Pooh Bear

Cletus said:


> Quite frankly, I'm now afraid to say anything.


Don't stop asking, Cletus. Be part of the conversation. But be willing to listen and be willing to be ok with anger. Because sexism does a lot of damage. But if you step out of the conversation, then nothing changes. We need men in this conversation.


----------



## DanaS

No doubt most men here may not like my comments but the truth hurts and most men will fight tooth and nail to maintain their male privilege. Ever wonder why relatively speaking it wasn't until very recently women were allowed to wear pants of all things? Because women wearing pants made it harder to rape them for Christs sake! 

I love how when women bring up all the violence/destruction men cause they retort with "But women kill/rape to", in some very isolated incidents yes but nowhere NEAR men. Men make up 90% of murderers. And we have a whole world full of women yet they don't cause mass death/rape/destruction. If women ruled the world you'd never see a female leader on the level of Hitler or Stalin for example, but there are PLENTY of men from America, to Europe to the middle east that would love nothing more than to have the power they did and do what they did.


----------



## Pooh Bear

*If you think that men don't deal with this, you are very wrong. our entire social status is defined by physical presence/how strong/survival of the fittest.
*
Right. Patriarchy is not good for men either. And yet, white men still have more privilege. You benefit more from it.

*And don't even say that Women don't support any of that......*

We are all raised in this muck.


----------



## larry.gray

Pooh Bear said:


> I don't know the experience of being a black man. That doesn't mean racism doesn't exist. It means that I have to start listening to how another person experiences that inequality.


Well that analogy doesn't work for me at all anymore. I am sick and tired of hearing about racism. In the world I have lived my entire life, guilty white liberals who are trying to overcompensate have done more to counter the racism that what racism does. I wasn't born when MLK gave his speech. I wasn't born when the march happened in Selma. I grew up in the era of the Huxtibles on TV.

I also grew up in a community where we had large numbers of immigrants from SE Asia. People who came here as refuges with NOTHING. And I watched those kids - my classmates - pass right on by and live the American Dream like no others. In SPITE of racism directed at them. They simply didn't care, they succeeded anyway. I'm fully embracing the Asian American attitude on racism. I'll tactically deal with it. If I see it in person I'll deal with it... other than that, I don't care.


----------



## EleGirl

Cletus said:


> I would like to take a moment to notice that a woman on this forum came out and gave the entire male gender both barrels in this discussion.
> 
> And not a single woman to this point has chimed in to upbraid her.


You are of course making assumptions of your own as to why. 

I can only speak for myself. 

Her posts are off topic and inappropriate. She was called down for them by at least 2-3 posters. I figure that those who called her out also reported her inappropriate posts to the moderators. So I assume that her posts will be deleted soon by a moderator. I don't want to give her more "air time" by quoting and re-posting her off topic rants. 

I did not know that it was required for women to call women out as though we all belong to the female team so we are all responsible for what other women say. Having 2-3 posters who calling her out and reporting her to the moderators should be enough. The fact that those 2-3 were male, and not female, does not matter.

Also note that no woman clicked 'like'. 

Another point is that it's pretty clear that the poster in question is obviously having a melt down. If you have read her recent thread, you know that. Her posts are so over the top that I am concerned about her mental state at this point. I'm more concerned that she's 7-8 months pregnant and having a melt down.


----------



## Pooh Bear

marduk said:


> And so is the reality for men.
> 
> You have no monopoly on suffering.


Everybody suffers. We are not talking about suffering. We are talking about privilege and power.


----------



## that.girl

DanaS said:


> No doubt most men here may not like my comments but the truth hurts and most men will fight tooth and nail to maintain their male privilege. Ever wonder why relatively speaking it wasn't until very recently women were allowed to wear pants of all things? Because women wearing pants made it harder to rape them for Christs sake!
> 
> I love how when women bring up all the violence/destruction men cause they retort with "But women kill/rape to", in some very isolated incidents yes but nowhere NEAR men. Men make up 90% of murderers. And we have a whole world full of women yet they don't cause mass death/rape/destruction. If women ruled the world you'd never see a female leader on the level of Hitler or Stalin for example, but there are PLENTY of men from America, to Europe to the middle east that would love nothing more than to have the power they did and do what they did.


I was enjoying the original course of this thread, which is now lost in accusations and rebuttals. 

Male privilege would certainly make for an interesting thread, and i recommend you go start it. But i think this thread has been hijacked enough. 

Any chance we could get back to the M/H complex? It strikes close to home for me, and I'd like to see some further thoughts.


----------



## Cletus

EleGirl said:


> I did not know that it was required for women to call women out as though we all belong to the female team so we are all responsible for what other women say.


C'mon, Ele. Let's have some intellectual honesty here. I've been around this forum long enough to know that if a guy would have made those statements about women, you'd have been (quite rightly) leading the lynch mob, at least for a post or two.


----------



## Pooh Bear

DoF said:


> Sure, can't disagree there, but it depends on what it is exactly.
> 
> For example, if you get hit on too much. Don't wear yoga pants or lay off make up.
> 
> If you feel threatened, take martial arts class/build strength......carry mace/weapon.
> 
> There is a solution to make your life easier on just about every end.
> 
> Ignoring idiots and not letting people get to you is probably the best of them all.


I see. We're responsible for men's bad behavior because we don't carry mace or wear yoga pants. So it is impossible for men not to behave the way they do? They just can't help themselves?


----------



## BradWesley

DanaS said:


> No doubt most men here may not like my comments but the truth hurts and most men will fight tooth and nail to maintain their male privilege. Ever wonder why relatively speaking it wasn't until very recently women were allowed to wear pants of all things? Because women wearing pants made it harder to rape them for Christs sake!
> 
> I love how when women bring up all the violence/destruction men cause they retort with "But women kill/rape to", in some very isolated incidents yes but nowhere NEAR men. Men make up 90% of murderers. And we have a whole world full of women yet they don't cause mass death/rape/destruction. If women ruled the world you'd never see a female leader on the level of Hitler or Stalin for example, but there are PLENTY of men from America, to Europe to the middle east that would love nothing more than to have the power they did and do what they did.


Seriously

Did you forget to take your meds this morning?


----------



## EleGirl

DanaS said:


> Ever wonder why relatively speaking it wasn't until very recently women were allowed to wear pants of all things? Because women wearing pants made it harder to rape them for Christs sake!


Actually women did wear pants.. under their dresses. They were called nickers. They went down at least to the knees usually. In winter they were basically long wool pants.


----------



## DanaS

EleGirl said:


> You are of course making assumptions of your own as to why.
> 
> I can only speak for myself.
> 
> Her posts are off topic and inappropriate. She was called down for them by at least 2-3 posters. I figure that those who called her out also reported her inappropriate posts to the moderators. So I assume that her posts will be deleted soon by a moderator. I don't want to give her more "air time" by quoting and re-posting her off topic rants.
> 
> I did not know that it was required for women to call women out as though we all belong to the female team so we are all responsible for what other women say. Having 2-3 posters who calling her out and reporting her to the moderators should be enough. The fact that those 2-3 were male, and not female, does not matter.
> 
> Also note that no woman clicked 'like'.
> 
> Another point is that it's pretty clear that the poster in question is obviously having a melt down. If you have read her recent thread, you know that. Her posts are so over the top that I am concerned about her mental state at this point. I'm more concerned that she's 7-8 months pregnant and having a melt down.


How is what I said inappropriate? I'm just telling it like it is, not to mention I have been "liked" on my posts by women so obviously there are some women that agree. 

I find it ironic actually, men can spout off all their stupid macho anti-woman BS and won't ever listen to reason yet expect us to take everything they say as gospel just because they are men yet when women speak up, no matter how true/legitimate it may be we're supposed to back down and not get so serious/angry. Since the beginning men have brutally oppressed women, not giving them rights, raping them left and right just because they can, treating them as less than human etc. I think we have every right to say what we want to them and if they don't like it then perhaps they should stop treating our thoughts/desires as inferior to theirs. I don't care if men are offended or suffer, they deserve it.


----------



## EleGirl

Cletus said:


> C'mon, Ele. Let's have some intellectual honesty here. I've been around this forum long enough to know that if a guy would have made those statements about women, you'd have been (quite rightly) leading the lynch mob, at least for a post or two.


Yep, I've been TAM for some time now. There have been threads on which men have ranted on just as horribly about women. And a lot of the men here click 'like' on those rants.

Sure they are not accusing women of raping, murder and all that crap.. but they do accuse women of some ugly things. Few men every stand up and tell a guy who rants on like that to stop it. 

So yes, let's have some intellectual honesty. I have told some men to stop their nonsense. But few if any men tell those men to stop it.


----------



## I Don't Know

DanaS said:


> No doubt most men here may not like my comments but the truth hurts and most men will fight tooth and nail to maintain their male privilege. *Ever wonder why relatively speaking it wasn't until very recently women were allowed to wear pants of all things? Because women wearing pants made it harder to rape them for Christs sake!*
> 
> I love how when women bring up all the violence/destruction men cause they retort with "But women kill/rape to", in some very isolated incidents yes but nowhere NEAR men. Men make up 90% of murderers. And we have a whole world full of women yet they don't cause mass death/rape/destruction. If women ruled the world you'd never see a female leader on the level of Hitler or Stalin for example, but there are PLENTY of men from America, to Europe to the middle east that would love nothing more than to have the power they did and do what they did.


What. The. Fark.


----------



## staarz21

DanaS said:


> How is what I said inappropriate? I'm just telling it like it is, not to mention I have been "liked" on my posts by women so obviously there are some women that agree.
> 
> I find it ironic actually, men can spout off all their stupid macho anti-woman BS and won't ever listen to reason yet expect us to take everything they say as gospel just because they are men yet when women speak up, no matter how true/legitimate it may be we're supposed to back down and not get so serious/angry. Since the beginning men have brutally oppressed women, not giving them rights, raping them left and right just because they can, treating them as less than human etc. I think we have every right to say what we want to them and if they don't like it then perhaps they should stop treating our thoughts/desires as inferior to theirs. I don't care if men are offended or suffer, they deserve it.


What happened to women in the past is in the past. Women are not treated the same way now as they were then. There are still some hiccups, but nothing like what you said when comparing men to the Taliban though. I think, in general, women in America are doing okay. Can we say that for women in the middle - east? No. 

Yes, some things are still a little unfair, but to be honest....BOTH genders do crappy things. BOTH genders each have their own issues. BOTH genders have to deal with a fair amount of crap from the opposite gender. Neither gender is completely right and neither gender is completely wrong. 

We are talking about the virgin/ wh*re issue...not your hatred toward men. Has the virgin/wh*re thing had any effect in your life? Let's keep rapes, sexual assault, and why women couldn't wear pants....out of the discussion.


----------



## Marduk

Pooh Bear said:


> Everybody suffers. We are not talking about suffering. We are talking about privilege and power.


And how the perceived privilege and power leads to suffering, no?

Otherwise there would be no debate.


----------



## BradWesley

Popcorn anyone?


----------



## Pooh Bear

*My "friends" used to call me a "sucker", "***** wipped"*

Yeah. I don't like it when people say things like that about or too men. It just implies that he should be some he-man in the marriage and precludes equality in marriage.

*Another thing many women don't realize. MEN and our entire society consistently makes fun of male virgins 
*
True. Those stereotypes need to be changed also.


----------



## that.girl

BradWesley said:


> Popcorn anyone?


I'd share mine, but i wouldn't want you guys to think i give it up too easily.


----------



## staarz21

that.girl said:


> I'd share mine, but i wouldn't want you guys to think i give it up too easily.


:lol: Yes indeed.


----------



## Marduk

that.girl said:


> I was enjoying the original course of this thread, which is now lost in accusations and rebuttals.
> 
> Male privilege would certainly make for an interesting thread, and i recommend you go start it. But i think this thread has been hijacked enough.
> 
> Any chance we could get back to the M/H complex? It strikes close to home for me, and I'd like to see some further thoughts.


Where I'm slipping a gear is in the dichotomy.

I mean, sure, a lot of dudes get their undies in a knot about their sweet little wives having a past...

But I think, from this guy's perspective, we want to put all that on a shelf and be special, sex-wise. I think that, mixed with basic male insecurities and anxieties is what's at play here.

And we all have insecurities and anxieties, men and women alike. How we deal with them when it comes to sex is a touchy thing, especially when looking at pushing some boundaries in the bedroom.


----------



## Pooh Bear

*Women don't worry about going out at any time of night around here. To an ATM, or anywhere else. There were TWO reported rapes in my county last year.... TWO.*

Right. But most rapes are not stranger rapes; they are acquintance rapes.

*Yeah, yeah, it's those other men. But you are painting us with a broad brush. 
*
I agree.


----------



## Cletus

I had no idea whatsoever that there were so many men who wasted so much mental energy and hand-wringing over their wife's sexual history before I came here. It was and still is an utterly foreign concept to me. You also don't notice too many women with the same hangup.


----------



## Marduk

Cletus said:


> I had no idea whatsoever that there were so many men who wasted so much mental energy and hand-wringing over their wife's sexual history before I came here. It was and still is an utterly foreign concept to me. You also don't notice too many women with the same hangup.


I have a don't ask/don't tell policy myself.

There's some things I just don't want to know... I mean I know the basics, and some of the crazier things, but for the most part I just put my hands over my ears and go lalalalala unless there's something she really has to talk about.

Seems to help.

I mean, I have a past too, and I'm not going to let my insecurities run away with themselves and end up accidentally slvt shaming my wife, when I love having crazy sex with her.

And, why think about it at all once you get past the "I don't like this" and "I like to do that" stuff.


----------



## Pooh Bear

Cletus said:


> Sigh. Of course I know that.
> 
> It also doesn't mean that a man in my home town experiences racism the same way or to the same degree that a man living in Mobile, AL might experience racism.
> 
> Am I to substitute the opinions on this forum for the words right out of my wife's mouth for her experience of sexual discrimination? Why is it causing so many minds to be blown to say that the degree to which women have to put up with this varies depending on where you live?


Actually, I spoke with a black man once who said he would rather live in the south where the racism is more explicit. Other have racism it is just more subtle. 

I live in Portland too. I don't know that it makes that much of a difference. I still hear the same tired stereotypes here. Things have changed a lot from the 1950's but there is still a lot of work to do. That's all. I mean and we are also a country so it is more than just the place you are. You know that there is only one woman among our elected officials to congress in Oregon? We haven't had a female governer in ages. There are still people who go protest abortion clinics in Portland. I still hear Father for God at church every Sunday. And I go to a liberal church! We are more liberal, yes, but that doesn't mean we are free from sexism.


----------



## Cletus

I intend to ask my wife some very pointed questions about this tonight, and if the answer is different from what I expect, some very pointed questions about that too.


----------



## EleGirl

DanaS said:


> How is what I said inappropriate? I'm just telling it like it is, not to mention I have been "liked" on my posts by women so obviously there are some women that agree.
> 
> I find it ironic actually, men can spout off all their stupid macho anti-woman BS and won't ever listen to reason yet expect us to take everything they say as gospel just because they are men yet when women speak up, no matter how true/legitimate it may be we're supposed to back down and not get so serious/angry.


What you have done is similar to what a some of the guys on here do. You took a bit of truth and then twisted it. And that twisting is what is inappropriate. Here are two examples. 

Now you list some facts such as most violent crime is committed by men. Yep we all know that. You also state that most rapists get off with light sentences if they get any consequences at all for their crimes. But then you throw in this nonsense.



DanaS said:


> It sure is funny how American men love to think they are so progressive and "enlightened" compared to men in other parts of the world but the truth is most mens mentalities are little better than the Taliban.


Now first off. The vast majority of men in America do not commit violent crimes. Most commit no crimes at all. Very few men commit rape.

But here you are saying that all American men are little better than the Taliban. Have you ever lived in a place in which people have attitudes like the Taliban? Have you ever experienced it? I have. I can tell you from personal experience that 99.99% of men in America are a thousand times better than men in who are indoctrinated to the attitudes of the Taliban. If you really believe what you wrote in the above paragraph, you are just down right clueless.



DanaS said:


> Let me ask you this: If every man in America were given a device that allowed them to just point it at any woman they wanted, press one button and she'd do whatever they wanted for as long as they wanted no questions asked how many men do you think would happily use it time and time again? I'd estimate 80-90%.


And then there is the above gem. I love this.. you make up some wild scenario that can never happen, and then use to it bash 80-90% of all men. Now the men have not done anything at all, but that does not stop you from then accusing them all of this.

To be honest, I think that in their wildest dreams most people would love to have a device that would allow them the control all people around them. It could be fun for a while or at certain times. And so what if in our wildest dreams we would love such a device. We love it and not just for sex… how about it.. I could get all the remodeling and upgrades I want done to my house for free. And after that…. Who knows.

Come on get real. 



DanaS said:


> Since the beginning men have brutally oppressed women, not giving them rights, raping them left and right just because they can, treating them as less than human etc. I think we have every right to say what we want to them and if they don't like it then perhaps they should stop treating our thoughts/desires as inferior to theirs. I don't care if men are offended or suffer, they deserve it.


 In the first place, this is not what this thread is about. If you want to have a thread to discuss this sort of topic, start your own thread. You are hijacking this thread and turning it into an ugly fight. Most of us want to only discuss the topic at hand… M/H thing.

Men living in the USA today are not responsible for what men did in the past. They are not responsible for what men in 3rd world countries do. I know too many men in my real life, here in the USA, who are not anything like what you portray. They are good decent men. If you want men to understand about equality for women, you cannot accuse all men the way you are doing. Because if you accuse a good man of being a bad man he’s not going to listen to you anymore.


----------



## ConanHub

I am wondering if Danas daughter got a hold of her account? 

Anyway, this thread was specifically aimed at asking women about an issue that affects them. I suggest all men pull back and observe. Ask questions pertaining to how they have experienced Madonna/Wh0re and be enlightened.

This is NOT directly about us. I really enjoy having ladies open up and share their perspectives. This is not about men challenging women, but asking how they have felt shaped or harmed by this topic.

Sit back gentlemen. Women are intriguing and, if allowed, very warm and open with what makes them tick.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Cletus

EleGirl said:


> What you have done is similar to what a some of the guys on here do. You took a bit of truth and the twisted it. And that twisting is what is inappropriate. Here are two examples.


Better. Thank you. I will do what I can to reciprocate as the need arises, though I can guarantee it will be with a sharper tongue (being incapable of sympathy and all that).


----------



## EleGirl

Cletus said:


> I had no idea whatsoever that there were so many men who wasted so much mental energy and hand-wringing over their wife's sexual history before I came here. It was and still is an utterly foreign concept to me. You also don't notice too many women with the same hangup.


Me too. I've never even had a guy ask me my sexual history. It's never come up in conversation... not even serious conversation when talking about marriage.

The first I ever heard of men being hung up on their gf/wife's sexual history has been here on TAM. So somehow I lived through 62 years of life before finding out that this is a hot topic among American men.

{Note: I know it's a big topic with men in places like the Middle East, some parts of Africa, India.. basically in 3rd world countries with strong conservative religious social norms. But in the USA?}


----------



## Pooh Bear

DanaS said:


> How is what I said inappropriate? I'm just telling it like it is, not to mention I have been "liked" on my posts by women so obviously there are some women that agree.
> 
> I find it ironic actually, men can spout off all their stupid macho anti-woman BS and won't ever listen to reason yet expect us to take everything they say as gospel just because they are men yet when women speak up, no matter how true/legitimate it may be we're supposed to back down and not get so serious/angry. Since the beginning men have brutally oppressed women, not giving them rights, raping them left and right just because they can, treating them as less than human etc. I think we have every right to say what we want to them and if they don't like it then perhaps they should stop treating our thoughts/desires as inferior to theirs. I don't care if men are offended or suffer, they deserve it.


I think you're stereotyping men and that's not any more fair than stereotyping women. Yes, white men have privilege but often they are not even aware of it. I don't know how aware I am of my white privilege. 

It frustrates me also when people argue that privilege does not exist. And yes, violence is used to maintain patriarchy. I just don't think that the way you are talking about men in general is helpful or fair.


----------



## Marduk

EleGirl said:


> What you have done is similar to what a some of the guys on here do. You took a bit of truth and the twisted it. And that twisting is what is inappropriate. Here are two examples.
> 
> Now you list some facts such as most violent crime is committed by men. Yep we all know that. You also state that most rapists get off with light sentences if they get any consequences at all for their crimes. But then you throw in this nonsense.
> 
> 
> 
> Now first off. The vast majority of men in America do not commit violent crimes. Most commit no crimes at all. Very few men commit rape.
> 
> But here you are saying that all American men are little better than the Taliban. Have you ever lived in a place in which people have attitudes like the Taliban? Have you ever experienced it? I have. I can tell you from personal experience that 99.99% of men in America are a thousand times better than men in who are indoctrinated to the attitudes of the Taliban. If you really believe what you wrote in the above paragraph, you are just down right clueless.
> 
> 
> 
> And then there is the above gem. I love this.. you make up some wild scenario that can never happen, and then use to it bash 80-90% of all men. Now the men have not done anything at all, but that does not stop you from then accusing them all of this.
> 
> To be honest, I think that in their wildest dreams most people would love to have a device that would allow them the control all people around them. It could be fun for a while or at certain times. And so what if in our wildest dreams we would love such a device. We love it and not just for sex… how about it.. I could get all the remodeling and upgrades I want done to my house for free. And after that…. Who knows.
> 
> Come on get real.
> 
> 
> 
> In the first place, this is not what this thread is about. If you want to have a thread to discuss this sort of topic, start your own thread. You are hijacking this thread and turning it into an ugly fight. Most of us want to only discuss the topic at hand… M/H thing.
> 
> Men living in the USA today are not responsible for what men did in the past. They are not responsible of what men in 3rd world countries do. I know too many men in my real life, here in the USA, who are not anything like what you portray. They are good decent men. If you want men to understand about equality for women, you cannot accuse all men the way you are doing. Because if you accuse a good man of being a bad man he’s not going to listen to you anymore.


You rock.


----------



## Pooh Bear

marduk said:


> And how the perceived privilege and power leads to suffering, no?
> 
> Otherwise there would be no debate.


I suppose you could see it that way. But we all suffer even within those power structures. The powerful are not immune from suffering because of their power - it is just different. But it is also about freedom and what choices people are able to make in their lives. Do you get to make decisions for me or do I? You can call that suffering. And it's not just gender privilege. It's racial privilege, class, sexual identity, all of it. Privilege and power are complicated.


----------



## EleGirl

Getting back on topic, I found the below at the link provided.....

-------------------------------
Where such men love they have no desire, and where they desire they cannot love,” Sigmund Freud wrote back in 1925. The founding father of psychoanalysis coined the Madonna-***** complex – a condition whereby men view women as either saintly, virgin Madonna’s or sexual “*****s”.


In essence, the effect of Madonna-***** on a relationship is an inability of the man to maintain sexual arousal within a committed, loving partnership. In his psyche he categorizes women into two groups: women he can admire and women he finds sexually attractive; the former he loves, the latter he devalues.

Dr. Patrick Suraci, Ph.D., and author of “Male Sexual Armor: Erotic Fantasies and Sexual Realities of the Cop on the Beat and the Man in the Street” explained the origins to Alternet:

“Historically men had a dichotomy in their perception of women. In the past, men, especially teens, had the idea that they had to marry a 'good girl' - a virgin. They only had sex with the 'fast girls' or 'bad girls'. They waited until marriage with a 'good girl' - a Madonna, before engaging in sexual activities with her. Literally, sometimes they went to a ***** for their first sexual experience. The advent of the pill changed the way women approached sex and thus men had to also change their views to accommodate women”, he told Alternet.

From then on, Dr. Suraci explained, women were as free to have sex as men were, and men no longer had to make a distinction between good and bad girls and didn't expect to marry a virgin. 

Yet, despite the effect that female contraception had on the women's liberation movement and that we live in a post Third-wave feminism era, the dichotomy still rears its ugly head today through pop culture, ****-shaming and condemning women in society who enjoy sex as being a *****. Equally as patronizing to feminists, is the ‘Madonna’ label whereby men put a woman on a pedestal as someone to be protected and subservient to men. 

As it applies in the context of relationships in modern times, Madonna-***** complex generally manifests itself after marriage or the birth of a child as Dr. Suraci explains:

“A man may think of his wife as a mother and not an appropriate sex partner. He is accustomed to having intercourse with a sexy woman and his wife does not fit the bill. She is now the mother - Madonna. Unconsciously, she may remind him of his mother who cannot be a sexual being,” he said.

read more here.....
http://www.alternet.org/sex-amp-relationships/unveiling-madonna-*****-complex


----------



## nuclearnightmare

Cletus said:


> I had no idea whatsoever that there were so many men who wasted so much mental energy and hand-wringing over their wife's sexual history before I came here. It was and still is an utterly foreign concept to me. You also don't notice too many women with the same hangup.



I think many (I would bet most) men's preference for less sexually experienced women is in a sense 'unfair' to a number of women. Its a somewhat irrational fear but it is deep seeded, i think, and can be powerful.

I am not sure why this constantly comes to mind when we have these discussions, but I see an anology in the opposite direction with women's preference for tall (er) men. which many of them admit is not really rational but nonetheless deep seeded (they feel) and is in the same sense 'unfair' to a number of men. 
so in terms of marriage options being affected, its hard for me to feel any sadder, or more outraged, for very sexually experienced women than I do for short men. if one is a travesty and a tragedy, so is the other.


----------



## Marduk

Pooh Bear said:


> I suppose you could see it that way. But we all suffer even within those power structures. The powerful are not immune from suffering because of their power - it is just different. But it is also about freedom and what choices people are able to make in their lives. Do you get to make decisions for me or do I? You can call that suffering. And it's not just gender privilege. It's racial privilege, class, sexual identity, all of it. Privilege and power are complicated.


That's been my whole point regarding the "Men are bad" and "Women have it worse then men" stuff.

When one of us suffer, we all do. Even if we think it's not true, it is.

We are 100% in agreement, well said.


----------



## Marduk

nuclearnightmare said:


> I think many (I would bet most) men's preference for less sexually experienced women is in a sense 'unfair' to a number of women. Its a somewhat irrational fear but it is deep seeded, i think, and can be powerful.
> 
> I am not sure why this constantly comes to mind when we have these discussions, but I see an anology in the opposite direction with women's preference for tall (er) men. which many of them admit is not really rational but nonetheless deep seeded (they feel) and is in the same sense 'unfair' to a number of men.
> so in terms of marriage options being affected, its hard for me to feel any sadder, or more outraged, for very sexually experienced women than I do for short men. if one is a travesty and a tragedy, so is the other.


Interesting analogy. I'm sure there's some instinctual stuff going on down deep there, maybe some stuff that's pretty hard coded.

Selecting for height is a thing. A thing that can be overcome, but a thing nonetheless.


----------



## Pooh Bear

EleGirl said:


> Getting back on topic, I found the below at the link provided.....
> 
> -------------------------------
> Where such men love they have no desire, and where they desire they cannot love,” Sigmund Freud wrote back in 1925. The founding father of psychoanalysis coined the Madonna-***** complex – a condition whereby men view women as either saintly, virgin Madonna’s or sexual “*****s”.
> 
> 
> In essence, the effect of Madonna-***** on a relationship is an inability of the man to maintain sexual arousal within a committed, loving partnership. In his psyche he categorizes women into two groups: women he can admire and women he finds sexually attractive; the former he loves, the latter he devalues.
> 
> Dr. Patrick Suraci, Ph.D., and author of “Male Sexual Armor: Erotic Fantasies and Sexual Realities of the Cop on the Beat and the Man in the Street” explained the origins to Alternet:
> 
> “Historically men had a dichotomy in their perception of women. In the past, men, especially teens, had the idea that they had to marry a 'good girl' - a virgin. They only had sex with the 'fast girls' or 'bad girls'. They waited until marriage with a 'good girl' - a Madonna, before engaging in sexual activities with her. Literally, sometimes they went to a ***** for their first sexual experience. The advent of the pill changed the way women approached sex and thus men had to also change their views to accommodate women”, he told Alternet.
> 
> From then on, Dr. Suraci explained, women were as free to have sex as men were, and men no longer had to make a distinction between good and bad girls and didn't expect to marry a virgin.
> 
> Yet, despite the effect that female contraception had on the women's liberation movement and that we live in a post Third-wave feminism era, the dichotomy still rears its ugly head today through pop culture, ****-shaming and condemning women in society who enjoy sex as being a *****. Equally as patronizing to feminists, is the ‘Madonna’ label whereby men put a woman on a pedestal as someone to be protected and subservient to men.
> 
> As it applies in the context of relationships in modern times, Madonna-***** complex generally manifests itself after marriage or the birth of a child as Dr. Suraci explains:
> 
> “A man may think of his wife as a mother and not an appropriate sex partner. He is accustomed to having intercourse with a sexy woman and his wife does not fit the bill. She is now the mother - Madonna. Unconsciously, she may remind him of his mother who cannot be a sexual being,” he said.
> 
> read more here.....
> http://www.alternet.org/sex-amp-relationships/unveiling-madonna-*****-complex


Interesting. Did you tell your story EleGirl?


----------



## larry.gray

Pooh Bear said:


> Actually, I spoke with a black man once who said he would rather live in the south where the racism is more explicit. Other have racism it is just more subtle.


There really are three different places to choose from though.

You have the South where if they're racist, they are open about it. At least there you know where people stand.

You have the Midwest where the racists are hidden, and I see exactly what your black friend sees. They're hidden racists.

Then you have the West coast, where racism is rare.


----------



## Marduk

I wonder if Freud was noticing more of a social phenomenon than a biological or psychological one...

I've never fallen in love with a woman I wasn't sexually attracted to, and the crazier sex we have, the more I'm in love with her, or likely to fall in love with her.

This is why I don't quite get the dichotomy. Can a woman not be both the symbolic virgin/wh*ore to her husband and herself? 

Is that a problem?

Or is the problem that men marry women because they're chaste, and don't end up with wh*res and are mad about that?

Or marry wh*res and are mad about that?

I guess I'm missing the problem... doesn't every woman kinda at one point or another not have aspects of both within her?

Or is that a disrespectful thing to say? And feel free to criticize me if it is.


----------



## EleGirl

nuclearnightmare said:


> I think many (I would bet most) men's preference for less sexually experienced women is in a sense 'unfair' to a number of women. Its a somewhat irrational fear but it is deep seeded, i think, and can be powerful.
> 
> I am not sure why this constantly comes to mind when we have these discussions, but I see an analogy in the opposite direction with women's preference for tall (er) men. which many of them admit is not really rational but nonetheless deep seeded (they feel) and is in the same sense 'unfair' to a number of men.
> so in terms of marriage options being affected, its hard for me to feel any sadder, or more outraged, for very sexually experienced women than I do for short men. if one is a travesty and a tragedy, so is the other.


I think that a comparison between the fact that a lot of women prefer taller men vs the fact that some men seem to prefer women who no to little sexual history works very well. 

Why do I say this? Because a man who is relatively shorter than some other man is not judged to be morally corrupt and basically only good for being used and abused.

Regardless of some women preferring taller men, shorter men seem to do just fine in finding women who will be their gf’s and marry them. Go to Wal-Mart and the mall any day of the week and you will see that the most of the men are shorter than taller and most are with partners.

Women chose men who are taller is similar to men choosing (or wanting) only the more beautiful women.

However, women who are considered ‘[email protected]’ because they are wilder sexually are not as likely to find a man to form a long term relationship with, much less to marry them. Women are talked about using words like we are “used up”, “worn out”, etc. Basically like a woman who has sexual experience is a piece of spoiled meat. I cannot tell you how many times I’ve read men using those exact words about women… “spoiled meat”. 

How many men who are shorter than taller are called names and talked about in ways that are degrading and dehumanizing?


----------



## DanaS

I Don't Know said:


> What. The. Fark.


Well, way back in my college days I took a woman's study course and that was what I was told, that women weren't allowed to wear pants so they'd be easier to rape, which certainly makes since to me.


----------



## Pooh Bear

larry.gray said:


> There really are three different places to choose from though.
> 
> You have the South where if they're racist, they are open about it. At least there you know where people stand.
> 
> You have the Midwest where the racists are hidden, and I see exactly what your black friend sees. They're hidden racists.
> 
> Then you have the West coast, where racism is rare.


Not rare at all. My white pastor adopted three black children and they have had problems being bullied because of their race. Both of his older children have been stopped by the police. We just think we're above it here.


----------



## Cletus

marduk said:


> I wonder if Freud was noticing more of a social phenomenon than a biological or psychological one...


Personally, I have little respect for Freud. He had no regard for the scientific method in most of his ramblings. As the impetus behind a movement? Fine. Having anything at all to contribute to today's conversation? Not so much. 

Do not take that as a claim that this problem isn't real - just that asking Freud his opinion on it is probably not going to be very enlightening. 

Let's just say he was no Maxwell.


----------



## Marduk

EleGirl said:


> I think that a comparison between the fact that a lot of women prefer taller men vs the fact that some men seem to prefer women who no to little sexual history works very well.
> 
> Why do I say this? Because a man who is relatively shorter than some other man is not judged to be morally corrupt and basically only good for being used and abused.
> 
> Regardless of some women preferring taller men, shorter men seem to do just fine in finding women who will be their gf’s and marry them. Go to Wal-Mart and the mall any day of the week and you will see that the most of the men are shorter than taller and most are with partners.
> 
> Women chose men who are taller is similar to men choosing (or wanting) only the more beautiful women.
> 
> However, women who are considered ‘[email protected]’ because they are wilder sexually are not as likely to find a man to form a long term relationship with, much less to marry them. Women are talked about using words like we are “used up”, “worn out”, etc. Basically like a woman who has sexual experience is a piece of spoiled meat. I cannot tell you how many times I’ve read men using those exact words about women… “spoiled meat”.
> 
> How many men who are shorter than taller are called names and talked about in ways that are degrading and dehumanizing?


True, very true...

Can't a woman just decide that her past is none of her partner's damn business though?

I guess what you're saying though is she _should_ be able to talk about it and not be shamed, though, right?


----------



## larry.gray

SimplyAmorous said:


> I wanted at the very least 3 children...(if one wasn't a girl, we'd keep going),


I had a boss that had 9 sons because his wife insisted they keep trying for a girl. Eventually they adopted a Korean orphan.


----------



## nuclearnightmare

EleGirl said:


> I think that a comparison between the fact that a lot of women prefer taller men vs the fact that some men seem to prefer women who no to little sexual history works very well.
> 
> Why do I say this? Because a man who is relatively shorter than some other man is not judged to be morally corrupt and basically only good for being used and abused.
> 
> Regardless of some women preferring taller men, shorter men seem to do just fine in finding women who will be their gf’s and marry them. Go to Wal-Mart and the mall any day of the week and you will see that the most of the men are shorter than taller and most are with partners.
> 
> Women chose men who are taller is similar to men choosing (or wanting) only the more beautiful women.
> 
> However, women who are considered ‘[email protected]’ because they are wilder sexually are not as likely to find a man to form a long term relationship with, much less to marry them. Women are talked about using words like we are “used up”, “worn out”, etc. Basically like a woman who has sexual experience is a piece of spoiled meat. I cannot tell you how many times I’ve read men using those exact words about women… “spoiled meat”.
> 
> How many men who are shorter than taller are called names and talked about in ways that are degrading and dehumanizing?



I thinhk you're exagerrating the one side and minimizing the other. e.g. I think it depends just how short the man is whether people (women) call him names (behind his back talking to their friends) etc. and taller is not at all the same as better looking. women's preferences single out the height factor independently. I think many studies a show that.


----------



## EleGirl

marduk said:


> I wonder if Freud was noticing more of a social phenomenon than a biological or psychological one...
> 
> I've never fallen in love with a woman I wasn't sexually attracted to, and the crazier sex we have, the more I'm in love with her, or likely to fall in love with her.
> 
> This is why I don't quite get the dichotomy. Can a woman not be both the symbolic virgin/wh*ore to her husband and herself?
> 
> Is that a problem?
> 
> Or is the problem that men marry women because they're chaste, and don't end up with wh*res and are mad about that?
> 
> Or marry wh*res and are mad about that?
> 
> I guess I'm missing the problem... is every woman kinda at one point or another not have aspects of both within her?
> 
> Or is that a disrespectful thing to say? And feel free to criticize me if it is.


:scratchhead:

I think that one of the best ways to see this is that some men stop having sex with their wife once she is pregnant and/or has a baby. The most likely time for a man to start having affairs is when his wife pregnant or has recently given birth. Some men lose all sexual interest in their wife once she's a mother. They have a problem with meshing the sexual woman they married with the idea of a mother. I guess when they think mother, they think of their own mother and that's it. 

When I was a kid, my mother and other women used to have this saying that a woman needs to be a chief in the kitchen, a lady in the parlor and a [email protected] in the bedroom. I thought that was wise.

But now... I have an issue with the last part. Why? Because of the use of the word "[email protected]".

It continues the idea that a woman who has a wild, strong sexual appetite is a [email protected] or immoral. Without social conditioning telling women that sex is bad, dirty, etc women are very sexual.

Now I know that a lot of people think that women are not very sexual. We are. But society tries to teach and beat that out of us. If it were not true, FGM would not exist. 

Think of it... 

1) millions of young girls a year, every year for thousands of years, have had a good part of their genitalia removed (with no pain killers) to make sure that they never enjoy sex. Apparently someone thinks that if they are not mutilated like this they will have sex drives that are out of control. 

2) in all societies girls are taught from a very young age that sex is bad, it's dirty, it's something that men will do anything to trick them into doing... and so the girls/woman have to be ever careful to not allow themselves to be used this way. Now some will argue that this is not so in the USA today. I have 3 children, one daughter and 2 sons. They are now 25, 26, and 28. It was not that long ago that they were teens/ & early 20's. They hung around a lot with their friends and the idea of females they knew being 'slvts' and '[email protected]' vs 'good girls' came up a lot. The girls did talk quite often about how the guys perceived them because of their sexual experience or lack of sexual experience. Girls/women are still judged this way by the younger generations.

If women were not very sexual, then all this effort by society would not be necessary to make sure that women do not become sexually promiscuous, or '[email protected]'. 
Shaming women into holding back sexually has side effect on men. Growing up, men hear the same things. What the Madona/[email protected] complex is about is that men take on the idea that is taught to women.. that it’s shameful for a woman to enjoy sex. Hence it’s shameful for the men to love a woman as a wife (and mother of their children) and to have wild sex with her that she enjoys. This really screws up the sex in marriage.. I mean screws it up so that there is not a lot of good, wild screwing going on.

I think that we need to stop using words that are normally used to shame women when we talk about women being sexual. How about just saying not that women should be a ‘[email protected]’ in the bedroom. Saying that she needs to be “[email protected]” in the bedroom has the connotation of her debasing herself, being immoral and dirty. How about we say that a wife should enjoy the hell out of sex and her husband. Now that is what works for me and it’s what I think we should all want in our lives.
So I’m changing what the old ladies said.. .now that I’m an old lady I can do that.. 

A woman needs to be a chief in the kitchen, a lady in the parlor and sexy & wild in the bedroom.


----------



## Pooh Bear

Cletus said:


> Personally, I have little respect for Freud. He had no regard for the scientific method in most of his ramblings. As the impetus behind a movement? Fine. Having anything at all to contribute to today's conversation? Not so much.
> 
> Do not take that as a claim that this problem isn't real - just that asking Freud his opinion on it is probably not going to be very enlightening.
> 
> Let's just say he was no Maxwell.


Yeah. Freud is irritating. But cmon, he started psychology. Where would we be without Freud!


----------



## Cletus

Pooh Bear said:


> Yeah. Freud is irritating. But cmon, he started psychology. Where would we be without Freud!


A lot less afraid to smoke a cigar.


----------



## EleGirl

nuclearnightmare said:


> I thinhk you're exagerrating the one side and minimizing the other. e.g.


I think you are wrong. When men and women select mates looks and physical attributes are huge factors in this. A man's height is as much a criteria for a woman choosing a man as a woman's boobs, her hair, how slender she is, her looks, etc. Height is a physical attribute.

We can have twin sisters who completely meet whatever criteria some guy has for his perfect woman physically. But if one of them is sexually promiscuous and the other a virgin. Most people would judge the promiscuous one as a “[email protected]/slvt” and the other as the Madonna type. If this guy is like most men, (if you go by all the threads discussing this on TAM) this guy will reject the “[email protected]” twin and marry is the Madonna one. 




nuclearnightmare said:


> I think it depends just how short the man is whether people (women) call him names (behind his back talking to their friends) etc.


I’ve known a lot of short men as we all have. I’ve never known anyone to call a man names behind his back because he’s short. I’ve dated a lot of men… short, medium height and tall. Not once have I or anyone I know talked badly about any of these guys or any other guy because of his height. 

But I’ve known a lot of people who call women all kinds of filthy names to their face and behind their backs because it’s perceived that the women are less than a Madonna type.


nuclearnightmare said:


> and taller is not at all the same as better looking. women's preferences single out the height factor independently. I think many studies a show that.


Taller is part of being better looking. It’s a physical attribute that makes a man attractive. Just like a slender woman with big boob is physically more attractive to a large percentage of men.

An ugly tall man is still an ugly tall man. He’s not going to get many takers because he’s ugly.


----------



## EleGirl

Cletus said:


> A lot less afraid to smoke a cigar.


No.. I think it was Clinton that gave a lot of people that complex


----------



## Marduk

EleGirl said:


> :scratchhead:
> 
> I think that one of the best ways to see this is that some men stop having sex with their wife once she is pregnant and/or has a baby. The most likely time for a man to start having affairs is when his wife pregnant or has recently given birth. Some men lose all sexual interest in their wife once she's a mother. They have a problem with meshing the sexual woman they married with the idea of a mother. I guess when they think mother, they think of their own mother and that's it.
> 
> When I was a kid, my mother and other women used to have this saying that a woman needs to be a chief in the kitchen, a lady in the parlor and a [email protected] in the bedroom. I thought that was wise.
> 
> But now... I have an issue with the last part. Why? Because of the use of the word "[email protected]".
> 
> It continues the idea that a woman who has a wild, strong sexual appetite is a [email protected] or immoral. Without social conditioning telling women that sex is bad, dirty, etc women are very sexual.
> 
> Now I know that a lot of people think that women are not very sexual. We are. But society tries to teach and beat that out of us. If it were not true, FGM would not exist.
> 
> Think of it...
> 
> 1) millions of young girls a year, every year for thousands of years, have had a good part of their genitalia removed (with no pain killers) to make sure that they never enjoy sex. Apparently someone thinks that if they are not mutilated like this they will have sex drives that are out of control.
> 
> 2) in all societies girls are taught from a very young age that sex is bad, it's dirty, it's something that men will do anything to trick them into doing... and so the girls/woman have to be ever careful to not allow themselves to be used this way. Now some will argue that this is not so in the USA today. I have 3 children, one daughter and 2 sons. They are now 25, 26, and 28. It was not that long ago that they were teens/ & early 20's. They hung around a lot with their friends and the idea of females they knew being 'slvts' and '[email protected]' vs 'good girls' came up a lot. The girls did talk quite often about how the guys perceived them because of their sexual experience or lack of sexual experience. Girls/women are still judged this way by the younger generations.
> 
> If women were not very sexual, then all this effort by society would not be necessary to make sure that women do not become sexually promiscuous, or '[email protected]'.
> Shaming women into holding back sexually has side effect on men. Growing up, men hear the same things. What the Madona/[email protected] complex is about is that men take on the idea that is taught to women.. that it’s shameful for a woman to enjoy sex. Hence it’s shameful for the men to love a woman as a wife (and mother of their children) and to have wild sex with her that she enjoys. This really screws up the sex in marriage.. I mean screws it up so that there is not a lot of good, wild screwing going on.
> 
> I think that we need to stop using words that are normally used to shame women when we talk about women being sexual. How about just saying not that women should be a ‘[email protected]’ in the bedroom. Saying that she needs to be “[email protected]” in the bedroom has the connotation of her debasing herself, being immoral and dirty. How about we say that a wife should enjoy the hell out of sex and her husband. Now that is what works for me and it’s what I think we should all want in our lives.
> So I’m changing what the old ladies said.. .now that I’m an old lady I can do that..
> 
> A woman needs to be a chief in the kitchen, a lady in the parlor and sexy & wild in the bedroom.


Thanks for this.

I get it now.


----------



## ConanHub

Mrs. Conan is my personal sex slave. &#55357;&#56469;
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## EleGirl

DanaS said:


> Well, way back in my college days I took a woman's study course and that was what I was told, that women weren't allowed to wear pants so they'd be easier to rape, which certainly makes since to me.


You need to be very careful about things taught in college courses. Sometimes the person doing the teaching has an agenda and makes up stuff.

I'll give you an example from many I know about. One of my brothers was taking a class in college and slavery was the topic. The book and professor taught that slavery was an invention of Europeans and that it has been used by white men to enslave blacks. 

Now the young students in the class ate it up.. the professor went on about how this was all about white privilege and how whites are defective this way.

Well my brother, being like me, brought up facts in class with material to show that the profession was lying and he basically shut the professor down... 

Slavery has existed since the dawn of humanity. Every race and every civilization has used slavery as the basis for a work force. There were times in history when North Africans enslaved over 150 million Europeans as salves and about that same number of blacks from further south in African. There were times in history when people from the Middle East and North Africa took millions of people from the Indian Subcontinent as salves. Indians in the Americas kept slaves. Find any old civilization and they had slaves who were horribly abused and misused.. and they mostly got their slaves from neighboring societies.

Universities/colleges are not necessarily a bastion of truth. We need to filter what they teach with other things we know... and I brought up one thing that tells us that it's nonsense that women were not allowed to wear pants so that men can rape them... women wore nickers under their skirts. Nickers are pants. They just covered their pants with a skirt.

Even in places like the middle east today, the women very often wear pants under their abayas (the long, usually black, thing they wear to cover up).


----------



## EleGirl

ConanHub said:


> Mrs. Conan is my personal sex slave. &#55357;&#56469;


:rofl:


----------



## Cletus

EleGirl said:


> I’ve known a lot of short men as we all have. I’ve never known anyone to call a man names behind his back because he’s short. I’ve dated a lot of men… short, medium height and tall. Not once have I or anyone I know talked badly about any of these guys or any other guy because of his height.


Kevin James has made a complete career out of this one joke. Yeah, guys really do do this. A lot. In my experience.


----------



## ConanHub

OK. Off topic but I think math, proportion, arm and leg length, shoulder to hip ratio is THE major attraction factor regardless of gender.


----------



## Cletus

ConanHub said:


> OK. Off topic but I think math, proportion, arm and leg length, shoulder to hip ratio is THE major attraction factor regardless of gender.


Any weighted metric that does not include bust size is an automatic fail for at least one gender.


----------



## EleGirl

Cletus said:


> Kevin James has made a complete career out of this one joke. Yeah, guys really do do this. A lot. In my experience.


Are you saying that guys talk badly about shorter guys behind their backs? They call shorter guys names?


----------



## DanaS

staarz21 said:


> What happened to women in the past is in the past. Women are not treated the same way now as they were then. There are still some hiccups, but nothing like what you said when comparing men to the Taliban though. I think, in general, women in America are doing okay. Can we say that for women in the middle - east? No.


Ridiculous argument. I guess I should tell the Jews the holocaust is the past, just forget it, and stop looking for those that may still be alive that were involved. And to be honest saying that women in America/the west have it better than in the ME really isn't saying much. Sure you don't really see women being stoned to death/honor killed often but I am sure plenty of men would if they could to an ex gf/wife/girl that rejected him etc. 



> Yes, some things are still a little unfair, but to be honest....BOTH genders do crappy things. BOTH genders each have their own issues. BOTH genders have to deal with a fair amount of crap from the opposite gender. Neither gender is completely right and neither gender is completely wrong.


Are you for real? Sure both men and women do crappy things, but when men do crappy things the vast majority of the time it means people (mostly women) suffer/die/get seriously injured/destroyed etc. As for who is more right/wrong I would definitely say that women are right on average a hell of a lot more than men are. 

Women spend a LOT more time on average considering consequences and what their actions may do. Why else do you think women mature faster than men and why is most everything related to social/community work/talking about rights etc. dominated by women? 

Keep in mind, up until the early 20th century and up until then men thought putting little kids to work in very dangerous jobs where many were killed/hurt/maimed was perfectly fine, it wasn't until women started speaking up that things changed, same with those with disabilities, the homeless etc. Few men have ever cared who suffers because of the choices they make. 



> We are talking about the virgin/ wh*re issue...not your hatred toward men. Has the virgin/wh*re thing had any effect in your life? Let's keep rapes, sexual assault, and why women couldn't wear pants....out of the discussion.


Of course, I bet you'd be hard pressed to find a woman who hasn't been affected by it.


----------



## Cletus

EleGirl said:


> Are you saying that guys talk badly about shorter guys behind their backs? They call shorter guys names?


Guys are way more likely to do it right to his face.


----------



## DanaS

Personal said:


> William Booth, Joseph Rowntree and Edgar Murphy amongst many others.


There may have been some but nowhere near the amount of women that spoke up against it. It's quite obvious the vast majority of men were quite satisfied with how things were.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

larry.gray said:


> *I had a boss that had 9 sons because his wife insisted they keep trying for a girl. Eventually they adopted a Korean orphan*.


That's funny...The man he kept his word !! What a guy !.. I had no sisters (or brothers) and my Mother wasn't in my life, so I really really really wanted a daughter.

I found some woman on a C-section forum ...here she lived just 30 minutes from our house..... what did we have in common... a bunch of boys.. and we both wanted a daughter ....crazily we got pregnant with our girls within a month of each other.. hers was #9...and ours #5....

We were ecstatic !...got pics of our bellies together, our girls played together...

My H kept his word.. I'll give him that ... And I in return kept mine.. he told me I can have as many as I wanted, so long as I took care of them (meaning don't be whining they are too much work, expecting him to get up in the middle of the night, things like that)... 

I was/am a very happy Mom.


----------



## Anonymous07

Cletus said:


> Any weighted metric that does not include bust size is an automatic fail for at least one gender.


No, in the study of sex appeal, it's typically all about waist to hip ratio, tone of voice, symmetry of the face, and scent. It's all very interesting.


----------



## Pooh Bear

EleGirl said:


> You need to be very careful about things taught in college courses. Sometimes the person doing the teaching has an agenda and makes up stuff.
> 
> I'll give you an example from many I know about. One of my brothers was taking a class in college and slavery was the topic. The book and professor taught that slavery was an invention of Europeans and that it has been used by white men to enslave blacks.
> 
> Now the young students in the class ate it up.. the professor went on about how this was all about white privilege and how whites are defective this way.
> 
> Well my brother, being like me, brought up facts in class with material to show that the profession was lying and he basically shut the professor down...
> 
> Slavery has existed since the dawn of humanity. Every race and every civilization has used slavery as the basis for a work force. There were times in history when North Africans enslaved over 150 million Europeans as salves and about that same number of blacks from further south in African. There were times in history when people from the Middle East and North Africa took millions of people from the Indian Subcontinent as salves. Indians in the Americas kept slaves. Find any old civilization and they had slaves who were horribly abused and misused.. and they mostly got their slaves from neighboring societies.
> 
> Universities/colleges are not necessarily a bastion of truth. We need to filter what they teach with other things we know... and I brought up one thing that tells us that it's nonsense that women were not allowed to wear pants so that men can rape them... women wore nickers under their skirts. Nickers are pants. They just covered their pants with a skirt.
> 
> Even in places like the middle east today, the women very often wear pants under their abayas (the long, usually black, thing they wear to cover up).


I think slavery is a very complicated topic and slavery in the US was pretty different from other culture's slavery. In other cultures there was often a way for a slave to become a free person. In this country it was solely race based. No white people were slaves. Now this trafficking that is going on has its own complications. I don't think you can make a blanket statement when it comes to slavery. Its so complicated.


----------



## FrenchFry

Pooh Bear said:


> I was talking about this concept on another thread and I became curious as to how other women feel this has affected them. So tell me, have you noticed this concept in your own life? You don't have to get too personal but how would you say it has affected your sexuality and your relationships with men?


Hey Pooh Bear.

So, at the awesomely awkward age of 13, I got called a **** for daring to hang out with a group of girls who somehow got the schoolwide reputation of being ****ty. Me, I was new and shy and they were the only ones who would talk to me.

So, I had the reputation of being a **** years before I kissed, touched or slept with anyone. For me, I figured if I have the title, I'd make the most of it. I watched a ton of porn, learned a lot about sex and was always there to talk to anyone about it.

When I did actually have sex, it was weird. Turns out acting "*****y" doesn't actually give you the requisite information to have great sex. It took me years to have a partnered orgasm and to stop faking orgasms. Now that I don't feel like I'm putting on a show anymore, sometimes I felt like I was boring in bed. Not so much anymore, but it took forever to stop feeling inadequate.

Now, I'm 28 and been with my husband for 6 years so my *****y reputation has pretty much dissipated. I think only people with a number lower than mine would think I slept with a lot of people. But I still identify more with those women who were called ****s and slept with a lot of people than those who don't because I still do not prize any part of my virginity which was apparently destroyed at 13.


----------



## EleGirl

Pooh Bear said:


> I think slavery is a very complicated topic and slavery in the US was pretty different from other culture's slavery. In other cultures there was often a way for a slave to become a free person. In this country it was solely race based. No white people were slaves. Now this trafficking that is going on has its own complications. I don't think you can make a blanket statement when it comes to slavery. Its so complicated.


Yes slavery is complicated and I don't want to turn this into a discussion of slavery.. but... yes in some cultures there was a way for salves to free themselves. But in many, if not most, there was no way to become free. It's a fallacy that is taught these days that some how slavery in the USA was different. It's also a fallacy that there were no white salves in the Americas. There exist to day the records from ships in English salve traders that show thousands of Irish salves that during the 1650s, over 100,000 Irish children between the ages of 10 and 14 were taken from their parents and sold as slaves in the West Indies, Virginia and New England. In this decade, 52,000 Irish (mostly women and children) were sold to Barbados and Virginia. Another 30,000 Irish men and women were also transported and sold to the highest bidder. In 1656, Cromwell ordered that 2000 Irish children be taken to Jamaica and sold as slaves to English settlers.

There are people in the USA who do not want the truth of this known because they believe that it takes the power of the victimization that they like to wear as a mantel.

Slavery is a topic about which I am passionate. When I lived in Africa I witnessed it first hand. We lived 3 houses down from a very powerful man who was, among other things, a slave trader. On my way to school I'd watch his men herding children, using whips on them to keep them moving. I saw the slave markets selling the children. It probably impacted me so much because I identified with the children. Some of the children were sold into slavery by their own parents. Others were kids gathered up from the villages that were in forced government starvation (that's how they got rid of their political opponents.. they starved out the villages). These children had no way to buy their own freedom. They were usually worked and underfed until they died. It's still like this all over Africa. Anyone can buy a child in about $35 today in the right market places.

If you want to argue about slavery, start a thread, I'll be glad to join it.


----------



## techmom

DanaS said:


> Ridiculous argument. I guess I should tell the Jews the holocaust is the past, just forget it, and stop looking for those that may still be alive that were involved. And to be honest saying that women in America/the west have it better than in the ME really isn't saying much. Sure you don't really see women being stoned to death/honor killed often but I am sure plenty of men would if they could to an ex gf/wife/girl that rejected him etc.
> 
> 
> Are you for real? Sure both men and women do crappy things, but when men do crappy things the vast majority of the time it means people (mostly women) suffer/die/get seriously injured/destroyed etc. As for who is more right/wrong I would definitely say that women are right on average a hell of a lot more than men are.
> 
> Women spend a LOT more time on average considering consequences and what their actions may do. Why else do you think women mature faster than men and why is most everything related to social/community work/talking about rights etc. dominated by women?
> 
> Keep in mind, up until the early 20th century and up until then men thought putting little kids to work in very dangerous jobs where many were killed/hurt/maimed was perfectly fine, it wasn't until women started speaking up that things changed, same with those with disabilities, the homeless etc. Few men have ever cared who suffers because of the choices they make.
> 
> 
> Of course, I bet you'd be hard pressed to find a woman who hasn't been affected by it.


I think that you need a more healthy outlet for unloading your frustration about your circumstances. I would call myself a feminist, however both genders suffer the effects of patriarchy.

Note the alpha/beta male debates.


----------



## Pooh Bear

*It's also a fallacy that there were no white salves in the Americas. There exist to day the records from ships in English salve traders that show thousands of Irish salves that during the 1650s, over 100,000 Irish children between the ages of 10 and 14 were taken from their parents and sold as slaves in the West Indies, Virginia and New England. In this decade, 52,000 Irish (mostly women and children) were sold to Barbados and Virginia. Another 30,000 Irish men and women were also transported and sold to the highest bidder. In 1656, Cromwell ordered that 2000 Irish children be taken to Jamaica and sold as slaves to English settlers.*

Right. In the beginning. But it became solely black slavery.

*Slavery is a topic about which I am passionate. When I lived in Africa I witnessed it first hand. We lived 3 houses down from a very powerful man who was, among other things, a slave trader. On my way to school I'd watch his men herding children, using whips on them to keep them moving. I saw the slave markets selling the children. It probably impacted me so much because I identified with the children. Some of the children were sold into slavery by their own parents. Others were kids gathered up from the villages that were in forced government starvation (that's how they got rid of their political opponents.. they starved out the villages). These children had no way to buy their own freedom. They were usually worked and underfed until they died. It's still like this all over Africa. Anyone can buy a child in about $35 today in the right market places.*

That’s sad. That would break my heart.  

*If you want to argue about slavery, start a thread, I'll be glad to join it.
*

Nawww. I don’t want to spend that much time talking about it but I thought I would make a comment. I think it is something that would really have to be studied to know all of the intricacies.


----------



## EleGirl

FrenchFry said:


> Hey Pooh Bear.
> 
> So, at the awesomely awkward age of 13, I got called a **** for daring to hang out with a group of girls who somehow got the schoolwide reputation of being ****ty. Me, I was new and shy and they were the only ones who would talk to me.


This brings back memories. 

When I was in junior & high school in the USA we had neighbors who thought that since there were 5 teen girls living in my home that we were all slvts.

I have 4 sisters and 3 brothers. All the neighborhood kids, to include, gasp, boys, hung out at our house. So obviously if there were boys hanging out we were all loose girls. Right? 

The women who were spreading this nonsense would, of course, not allow their 'innocent' boys to come over to our [email protected] house.

The funny thing is that I did not even make out with a guy until I was a senior and did not have sex until I was 21. But I was labeled in the neighborhood as were my sisters.

At one point I learned that the woman who lived across the street from us was telling everyone that I was pregnant. So I, being not so nice, start going outside with things to make me look pregnant. I make sure that I walked in front of her house a lot with that big fake stomach. Eventually I got tired of it. But it was fun while it lasted... Ok I was a teen... 9th grade I think.


----------



## techmom

Patriarchy dictates to men that they have to be the special man, and in order to do that, the lady can't have above a certain number or else they will suffer from retroactive jealousy. However, they have fond memories of the *****s who f*cked them senseless back in the day. They marry the Virginial bride hoping that she will learn what got him charged up back then. Of course the bride is constantly being compared to women who were way more uninhibited than her, with a different sexual nature than her.

She feels that she can never compare, so why keep trying? The guy gets frustrated thinking that he can somehow unlock the vixen inside this "inhibited, frigid" wife. He knew who he was marrying but thought that he could mold and change her to what he wanted. Welcome to the sexless marriage.

Too many men think that they need to marry the virgin, if they thought different we could have so many happy marriages.

And so many more girls unashamed of their sexuality...


----------



## FrenchFry

It's pretty crazy. I pretty vivdly remember the first time it happened. A guy was walking towards me in the hallway and he lunged toward me and tried to grab at my chest. When I recoiled, he said:

"You hang out with Rebecca. You like it. ****."

Now I wonder where he got such vicious behavior.


----------



## Pooh Bear

FrenchFry said:


> It's pretty crazy. I pretty vivdly remember the first time it happened. A guy was walking towards me in the hallway and he lunged toward me and tried to grab at my chest. When I recoiled, he said:
> 
> "You hang out with Rebecca. You like it. ****."
> 
> Now I wonder where he got such vicious behavior.


Oh no. That's awful.


----------



## EleGirl

FrenchFry said:


> It's pretty crazy. I pretty vivdly remember the first time it happened. A guy was walking towards me in the hallway and he lunged toward me and tried to grab at my chest. When I recoiled, he said:
> 
> "You hang out with Rebecca. You like it. ****."
> 
> Now I wonder where he got such vicious behavior.


That's pretty bad. yea I wonder where he got that idea.


----------



## ConanHub

Sorry FrenchFry. You must have been scared and hurt to be treated that way.

I hope he outgrew ignorance. Boys can be stupid but it gets dangerous when they get older and are still behaving like idiots.


----------



## WandaJ

Pooh Bear said:


> Yeah. Freud is irritating. But cmon, he started psychology. Where would we be without Freud!


he has started psychoanalysis, but other than that his views were very much based in the male-oriented "psychology" . come on, ladies, have you once felt "penis envy"? Curiosity, but not envy. he just assumed we must have, since men were superior.


----------



## Pooh Bear

WandaJ said:


> he has started psychoanalysis, but other than that his views were very much based in the male-oriented "psychology" . come on, ladies, have you once felt "penis envy"? Curiosity, but not envy. he just assumed we must have, since men were superior.


You know I have thought of that. No, I have never wanted to replace my equipment with a penis. I like the penis.  But I don't want one myself. I kind of like my equipment.


----------



## EleGirl

I remember another one... I told this the other day in the women in the military thread.

When I was in the Army, there were guys who had the attitude that women in the Army are either lesbians or [email protected] It was an attitude that many guys were more than willing to talk about.

There was one time when I was in the NCO club and some new guy on base actually came up to me and asked me "They say that all women in the Army are lesbians or [email protected] Which are you?" My answer to him was that he'd never find out. 

This sort of harassment was not unusual. In my life I've done a lot of things that were not usual for women to do, certainly not in my mother's generation. She was born in 1921. I was born in 1949. So I was in a generation doing a lot of things that were not usual for women in the past. I often ran into the attitude that because I was putting myself out there.. like joining the Army, being an engineer, traveling through Europe, USA and other places by myself, etc that I was some how a sexually lose woman as well.. .the [email protected] thing was a pretty constant theme. There were men who flat out told me that they would not go out with me because I was clearly a [email protected] because of these things.

I was even told this because I bought myself a house when I was young and had large dogs. 

The Madona/[email protected] thing does not just apply to sexual behavior. It can apply to anything where women step outside of social norms. It was used to keep women in their place.


----------



## EleGirl

Pooh Bear said:


> You know I have thought of that. No, I have never wanted to replace my equipment with a penis. I like the penis.  But I don't want one myself. I kind of like my equipment.


Yea.. they fit together so nicely


----------



## always_alone

EleGirl said:


> However, women who are considered ‘wh[email protected]’ because they are wilder sexually are not as likely to find a man to form a long term relationship with, much less to marry them. Women are talked about using words like we are “used up”, “worn out”, etc. Basically like a woman who has sexual experience is a piece of spoiled meat. I cannot tell you how many times I’ve read men using those exact words about women… “spoiled meat”.
> 
> How many men who are shorter than taller are called names and talked about in ways that are degrading and dehumanizing?


I agree.

Where I grew up, once you got the label slvt (and it wasn't hard), you were no longer deserving of any respect. Lots of adjectives always went along with that word: stupid, nasty, dirty. You would be cat-called, insulted, disparaged, groped, laughed at.

But all the boys still wanted their piece.

And if you didn't give it to them, they despised you for it. If you did give it to them, they despised you for it.

Much different than being short, I would think.


----------



## always_alone

EleGirl said:


> This sort of harassment was not unusual. In my life I've done a lot of things that were not usual for women to do, certainly not in my mother's generation. She was born in 1921. I was born in 1949. So I was in a generation doing a lot of things that were not usual for women in the past. I often ran into the attitude that because I was putting myself out there.. like joining the Army, being an engineer, traveling through Europe, USA and other places by myself, etc that I was some how a sexually lose woman as well.. .the [email protected] thing was a pretty constant theme. There were men who flat out told me that they would not go out with me because I was clearly a [email protected] because of these things.


I can relate to this, as I too often did things that women are not supposed to do, and got very similar reactions for it.

It is one reason why I get so cross with people for criticizing women for being out-of-control risk takers for going to a bar alone or an atm machine at night. If women are to be judged so harshly for such small things, I can only imagine what they might say about a woman walking through the dusty streets in a foreign country where she doesn't know anyone and can't speak the language.

I also find it a bit disturbing that just being a woman is considered the equivalent of walking through the worst neighborhood of Detroit waving fistfulls of dollars. I mean, seriously?


----------



## Cletus

EleGirl said:


> There was one time when I was in the NCO club and some new guy on base actually came up to me and asked me "They say that all women in the Army are lesbians or [email protected] Which are you?" My answer to him was that he'd never find out.


Thank you for your service, and for the reminder of why I'm glad I failed the ROTC physical for having had childhood asthma. Instead, I went the civilian route to pay for school. While university life may not be completely devoid of sexism, it's not awash up to its chin like the military. 

In my educational and professional life, there has been little or no gender distinction whatsoever. Women were a vast minority in Electrical Engineering when I graduated in 1989, but the ones who were there worked as hard and received the same education as the rest of us, and when it came time to study for a final or celebrate with a beer after hours, we didn't much care what anyone was hiding under his or her clothing.

No one ever used the words sl*t or wh*re, certainly never to a woman's face. One of the guys in our circle got the nickname "shoot-and-roll " for his habitual one night stands, and we weren't using it as an honorific. We were nerds, working too hard to learn a difficult subject to be bothered with petty crap like enforcing gender bias. 

It has been like that ever since. As I've said before, the only time I ever almost got in trouble at work was for _not_ being gender blind. 

Compare this to your story. This is what I meant when early in this thread I said that some of you describe a world very, very different from the one in which I have lived.


----------



## Pooh Bear

*I also find it a bit disturbing that just being a woman is considered the equivalent of walking through the worst neighborhood of Detroit waving fistfulls of dollars. I mean, seriously?*

Good point!


----------



## SimplyAmorous

always_alone said:


> I can relate to this, as I too often did things that women are not supposed to do, and got very similar reactions for it.
> 
> It is one reason why I get so cross with people for criticizing women for being out-of-control risk takers for going to a bar alone or an atm machine at night. If women are to be judged so harshly for such small things, I can only imagine what they might say about a woman walking through the dusty streets in a foreign country where she doesn't know anyone and can't speak the language.
> 
> I also find it a bit disturbing that just being a woman is considered the equivalent of walking through the worst neighborhood of Detroit waving fistfulls of dollars. I mean, seriously?


Why can't it be chalked up to being *safety conscious.*..some of us are not risk takers, does that make us BAD people & we should tie our mouths shut.. when we have an opinion, lest it offend someone... 

Why does it have to be a gender thing at all ?

Dad&Hubby responded to my post that he would also warn his wife to NOT go out in the middle of the night... I almost responded to that yesterday...that although my H isn't much for starting conflict... he would over something like that !.. *because he cares about me*, and my safety.. he doesn't TRUST other people ...even the smallest risks *...we consider them*.. that's just a part of who we are...how we live. 

But really.... Why would I NOT want this.. I love this about him!

Where you jump to judgement, I see something completely different... that He's looking out for me .. and I am looking out for my friend.. 

It's really difficult to talk to people anymore if everything we say is taken with some gender bias attached to it.. 

I was one who listened to my elders when I was younger.. Gawd I must be so B O R I N G ... I don't handle bad things happening well.. I'd be so pi$$ed off* at myself* for putting myself in a bad situation.. it just wouldn't be good. If others don't mind that sort of Fall out and the risks are worth the possible danger.. that's well & good.. it's your life.. 

I just have a different mindset on it.. 

How about this one. we've never used a ATM in our lives. never wanted that feature.. not worth the small risk of someone robbing us -anytime, didn't want the extra fees.. so I better always have $$ on hand.. that is one way to avoid the issue altogether... I find that much easier .


----------



## turnera

I grew up when women were still considered defective if they weren't married by 25, preferably 21. So I got married.

In high school, I learned that if you didn't put out, you didn't get asked out. I tried holding out the first year and got rejected over and over. So I stopped fighting it. And grew to hate even the idea of sex because it was tied into my self esteem and self worth - and thus my rejection of myself because I DID give in and let guys do what they wanted. 

I guess I just never saw the group of people who judged you FOR having sex - only the ones who judged you for NOT having sex.


----------



## ConanHub

intheory said:


> Excellent post.
> 
> ConanHub, if you are still following this thread? Here is a perfect embodiment of the M/Wh complex in our culture.
> 
> While watching "horror" movies, I almost always say to my husband (when a young heroine is in peril), "She'll be okay, _as long as she doesn't have sex_."


Still following. Glad it got back on track. Don't the teen guys that are having sex in those movies get killed as well?

I have actually seen movies and pop culture promote promiscuous, irresponsible, abhorrent sexual behavior with no realistic repercussions.

I am finding the ladies actual experiences posted here to be very informative and eye opening.


----------



## 'CuseGal

Jumping in here as a newbie because the original topic is something I have noticed although not in the way it is being discussed.

I live in the admittedly liberal northeast. NY is probably the most liberal state other than CA at least if you believe the media. I have never been affected or known anyone who was affected by the M/H concept in either of the places I have lived - NY and MA.

So, I have found it interesting that I *DO* run across the M/H concept when I read romance novels - specifically romance novels set in Texas, Oklahoma, Alabama, Arizona, and Wyoming (yes I enjoy cowboy romance). There are a couple of authors I read that it is a frequent storyline where the guy has numerous sex partners until marriage but he insists that the woman he marry be a virgin. Whenever I read these books, I find myself angered by the double standard. And the fact that the heroines in these books never seem to be bothered by the fact that there IS a double standard. Oh yeah, it's OK that he slept around for 10 years before he met me, but that he expects me to be "pure." And wondering what these men expect the women they did sleep with before marriage to do about ever finding a marriage partner, since they are obviously no longer marriageable material. Do all the women who sleep around have to move to more liberal areas if they ever hope to find a husband? And there's always this idea that if a man sleeps with a virgin he has to marry her. So if that's the case where are they finding all these unmarried sl*ts to sleep with?

I don't consider it QUITE the same as the M/H issue, but I do have a friend who is a widow who started dating a Christian man who was willing to be with her as a widow who had only ever slept with her husband, but when he found out she'd slept with ONE other man a couple of years after her husband died, the guy dumped her. Apparently her number going from one to two made her unacceptable in his eyes, because she wasn't married to the second one.

I personally have only ever slept with one man - my ex-husband. We started sleeping together well before we married but there's never been anyone else for me. He on the other hand probably had 4 other women before me, I have no idea how many while we were married, and I honestly don't care how many there have been since we split up!


----------



## Pooh Bear

SimplyAmorous said:


> Why can't it be chalked up to being *safety conscious.*..some of us are not risk takers, does that make us BAD people & we should tie our mouths shut.. when we have an opinion, lest it offend someone...
> 
> Why does it have to be a gender thing at all ?
> 
> Dad&Hubby responded to my post that he would also warn his wife to NOT go out in the middle of the night... I almost responded to that yesterday...that although my H isn't much for starting conflict... he would over something like that !.. *because he cares about me*, and my safety.. he doesn't TRUST other people ...even the smallest risks *...we consider them*.. that's just a part of who we are...how we live.
> 
> But really.... Why would I NOT want this.. I love this about him!
> 
> Where you jump to judgement, I see something completely different... that He's looking out for me .. and I am looking out for my friend..
> 
> It's really difficult to talk to people anymore if everything we say is taken with some gender bias attached to it..
> 
> I was one who listened to my elders when I was younger.. Gawd I must be so B O R I N G ... I don't handle bad things happening well.. I'd be so pi$$ed off* at myself* for putting myself in a bad situation.. it just wouldn't be good. If others don't mind that sort of Fall out and the risks are worth the possible danger.. that's well & good.. it's your life..
> 
> I just have a different mindset on it..
> 
> How about this one. we've never used a ATM in our lives. never wanted that feature.. not worth the small risk of someone robbing us -anytime, didn't want the extra fees.. so I better always have $$ on hand.. that is one way to avoid the issue altogether... I find that much easier .


There's nothing wrong with caring about your safety. And yes, I would teach my daughter precautions. The problem is we blame women for rape by saying why did you do this or why did you do that. Instead of immediately condemning the rapist. And in the comparison between money in detroit and rape - someone is basically saying that my body is the equivelant of walking around with waving around a wad of money in a dangerous area. My body is not money. It is comparing my body to a piece of property. And it is always using an old argument. My body is a temptation for men. By my very nature, I am a tempation for men. What does that say to women? And then if you are raped, you blame yourself because you say to yourself, it's my fault because I could have prevented it right? If I had just not done this or that I could have stopped it. Instead we should be blaming the perpetrator from the start. The conversation needs to change. Women can take precautions but you can take all the precautions in the world and still be raped. And the blame is entirely on the rapist.


----------



## Cletus

SimplyAmorous said:


> Why can't it be chalked up to being *safety conscious.*..some of us are not risk takers, does that make us BAD people & we should tie our mouths shut.. when we have an opinion, lest it offend someone...
> 
> Why does it have to be a gender thing at all ?


I don't think it is, actually.

People are terrible at assessing risk. It's a well studied phenomenon. 

You should be more concerned about high cholesterol, smoking, getting into any motor vehicle, or not getting exercise than worrying about getting mugged at an ATM.


----------



## Pooh Bear

turnera said:


> I grew up when women were still considered defective if they weren't married by 25, preferably 21. So I got married.
> 
> In high school, I learned that if you didn't put out, you didn't get asked out. I tried holding out the first year and got rejected over and over. So I stopped fighting it. And grew to hate even the idea of sex because it was tied into my self esteem and self worth - and thus my rejection of myself because I DID give in and let guys do what they wanted.
> 
> I guess I just never saw the group of people who judged you FOR having sex - only the ones who judged you for NOT having sex.


I would say it is two side of the same coin. Either you are judged for being too sexual, or you are judged for not being sexual enough. It still makes a woman feel devalued for her sexuality.


----------



## Pooh Bear

'CuseGal said:


> Jumping in here as a newbie because the original topic is something I have noticed although not in the way it is being discussed.
> 
> I live in the admittedly liberal northeast. NY is probably the most liberal state other than CA at least if you believe the media. I have never been affected or known anyone who was affected by the M/H concept in either of the places I have lived - NY and MA.
> 
> So, I have found it interesting that I *DO* run across the M/H concept when I read romance novels - specifically romance novels set in Texas, Oklahoma, Alabama, Arizona, and Wyoming (yes I enjoy cowboy romance). There are a couple of authors I read that it is a frequent storyline where the guy has numerous sex partners until marriage but he insists that the woman he marry be a virgin. Whenever I read these books, I find myself angered by the double standard. And the fact that the heroines in these books never seem to be bothered by the fact that there IS a double standard. Oh yeah, it's OK that he slept around for 10 years before he met me, but that he expects me to be "pure." And wondering what these men expect the women they did sleep with before marriage to do about ever finding a marriage partner, since they are obviously no longer marriageable material. Do all the women who sleep around have to move to more liberal areas if they ever hope to find a husband? And there's always this idea that if a man sleeps with a virgin he has to marry her. So if that's the case where are they finding all these unmarried sl*ts to sleep with?
> 
> I don't consider it QUITE the same as the M/H issue, but I do have a friend who is a widow who started dating a Christian man who was willing to be with her as a widow who had only ever slept with her husband, but when he found out she'd slept with ONE other man a couple of years after her husband died, the guy dumped her. Apparently her number going from one to two made her unacceptable in his eyes, because she wasn't married to the second one.
> 
> I personally have only ever slept with one man - my ex-husband. We started sleeping together well before we married but there's never been anyone else for me. He on the other hand probably had 4 other women before me, I have no idea how many while we were married, and I honestly don't care how many there have been since we split up!


Thank you for sharing. Very good post. I actually see your friends experience fitting into the M/W argument very well. He deemed her a wh*re because she had had sex with one man more than he felt acceptable. So sad what happened to her.


----------



## ConanHub

I have noticed that in a certain genre of novels that women were more acceptable for marriage if they were less experienced or more pure sexually and men were preferable if they had more experience.


----------



## Pooh Bear

ConanHub said:


> I have noticed that in a certain genre of novels that women were more acceptable for marriage if they were less experienced or more pure sexually and men were preferable if they had more experience.


Yeah. And men eat that up too. I have kind of a sweet personality naturally and can be naive. I used to be more so. When I was 18, I was the image of the virginal girl. Men love that. I know I have gotten male attention because of that. It's a story though right. Both men and women buy into it.


----------



## always_alone

SimplyAmorous said:


> Why can't it be chalked up to being *safety conscious.*..some of us are not risk takers, does that make us BAD people & we should tie our mouths shut.. when we have an opinion, lest it offend someone...
> 
> Why does it have to be a gender thing at all ?


There is nothing at all wrong with being safety conscious, and I understand that people will have different definitions of what counts as a risk, and a different level of how much risk we're willing to take. 

I am not judging people for not wanting to do the things I've done, just commenting on the judgements I've received for doing them.

It doesn't have to be a gender issue, but it is. How often are men told they should never go out at night, never go to a bar alone, never travel on their own, never leave late shift at work on their own, etc?

Everytime the discussion of risk and safety comes up in these discussions, the inevitable comparison for a man is walking through the worst neighborhood in Detroit waving fistfulls of cash.

As far as I know, no one in all of history has ever been stupid enough to do that, but lots of people I know have been "stupid" enough to be female.


----------



## Pooh Bear

*You ask a lot of questions Pooh Bear.. I have a strong standard on myself to NOT put myself in a situation where unscrupulous strange men congregate ... to not be getting drunk so I don't know what the hell is going on ...just because I say this does NOT = the rapist deserves to get off... 

I have no regard for any man who is capable of this behavior..and I sure wouldn't defend him - are you kidding !... I stay as far away from ANYONE who might even have a HINT of that sort of animal in him.. don't want them in my life.. 

The bottom line to me is.. every day we have choices before us.. to be aware that this choice has a higher risk to it ...Yes, I do see some personal responsibility in this....in my world.. how I feel is.... Many things didn't have to happen (take heed!)....... but apparently this is unacceptable to speak out of our mouths or we are victim blaming.. * 

You can't necessarily tell a rapist by just looking at him or avoiding certain places or situations. Most rapes are acquitance rapes. Men who rape can be very charming. Or deceptive. You go in to a bar for a drink and a guy drugs your drink. Heck, look at Bill Cosby. These women were interested in help with their careers and he would drug their drink or convince them to take a pill. I mean if you someone you admire or are a little intimidated by says, here this will help with your headache, would you refuse? No one would think Bill Cosby is a rapist. He doesn't look like a rapist right? But yet we blame the women. I am not saying that it is ok to try to take all the precautions you can. But sometimes we cannot forsee, depending on our experiences. And even if we don't take precautions ultimately the onus is on the rapist, right? Why would anyone choose to rape? Why would anyone take advantage of someone for not taking a precaution? If you are walking down the street at 2am why am I entitled to attack you? By saying that women should be taking precautions we are saying that the rapist's action is all right. He is entitled to rape if you do not do x, y, and z.


----------



## Pooh Bear

*It doesn't have to be a gender issue, but it is. How often are men told they should never go out at night, never go to a bar alone, never travel on their own, never leave late shift at work on their own, etc?
*

Right. Our agency is limited solely because we are female and could be raped.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

always_alone said:


> There is nothing at all wrong with being safety conscious, and I understand that people will have different definitions of what counts as a risk, and a different level of how much risk we're willing to take.
> 
> I am not judging people for not wanting to do the things I've done, just commenting on the judgements I've received for doing them.
> 
> It doesn't have to be a gender issue, but it is. *How often are men told they should never go out at night, never go to a bar alone, never travel on their own, never leave late shift at work on their own, etc?*


 We have 5 sons ... I am most definitely more worried about my daughter, none of our sons have cell phones, but when she starts hanging around town with friends, you better believe she will have one.. I don't see anything wrong with being more concerned for THE FEMALE, she is the weaker sex physically ...it's so obvious.. Men do more brutal crimes over women, more RAPE, more killings.. this is all just pure and simple common sense to me. 

I do not understand for the life of me, why women get upset over this .. I just can't relate . I am happy there are good men , like our Fathers, our friends who will teach us to be careful ... 

And boys can certainly do some a** wiping stunts, don't kid yourself.. trying to impress girls, risks to their life & limb thinking they are invincible.. WE often warn our sons to NOT do this or that.. and show them examples of what COULD HAPPEN.. this is a part of our parenting -very much. 

MY husband kept telling his young guy at work , 24 yrs old, he kept driving the work truck carelessly goofing off.. he'd come home & tell me, he's gonna wreck, he's gonna wreck !.. he'd warn him.. well the dumb a** wrecked it the other day...it's just things like that.. *it didn't have to happen.*..now it's on his record & their are repercussions.. . 



> *Everytime the discussion of risk and safety comes up in these discussions, the inevitable comparison for a man is walking through the worst neighborhood in Detroit waving fistfulls of cash.*
> 
> As far as I know, no one in all of history has ever been stupid enough to do that, but lots of people I know have been "stupid" enough to be female.


 If the men are giving these examples, which is a new one to me...this is what I see- *from THEIR END (don't judge me for this)*..... they are trying to tell you (with puffed up exaggeration of course)....that these unscrupulous men (representing the BAD part of Detroit)..that yes... when they see a woman dressed provocatively, or whatever she is doing ...dancing, getting drunk, flirting, letting it all hang out.. that THESE MEN will read this as "advertising"...that -this one over here is ready and willing, she's looking for some action... Is that so radical ? *They are thinking with the mind of the perpetrador...which is already "twisted" and set on evil..*.


----------



## Pooh Bear

SimplyAmorous said:


> We have 5 sons ... I am most definitely more worried about my daughter, none of our sons have cell phones, but when she starts hanging around town with friends, you better believe she will have one.. I don't see anything wrong with being more concerned for THE FEMALE, she is the weaker sex physically ...it's so obvious.. Men do more brutal crimes over women, more RAPE, more killings.. this is all just pure and simple common sense to me.
> 
> I do not understand for the life of me, why women get upset over this .. I just can't relate . I am happy there are good men , like our Fathers, our friends who will teach us to be careful ...
> 
> And boys can certainly do some a** wiping stunts, don't kid yourself.. trying to impress girls, risks to their life & limb thinking they are invincible.. WE often warn our sons to NOT do this or that.. and show them examples of what COULD HAPPEN.. this is a part of our parenting -very much.
> 
> MY husband kept telling his young guy at work , 24 yrs old, he kept driving the work truck carelessly goofing off.. he'd come home & tell me, he's gonna wreck, he's gonna wreck !.. he'd warn him.. well the dumb a** wrecked it the other day...it's just things like that.. *it didn't have to happen.*..now it's on his record & their are repercussions.. .
> 
> If the men are giving these examples, which is a new one to me...this is what I see- *from THEIR END (don't judge me for this)*..... they are trying to tell you (with puffed up exaggeration of course)....that these unscrupulous men (representing the BAD part of Detroit)..that yes... when they see a woman dressed provocatively, or whatever she is doing ...dancing, getting drunk, flirting, letting it all hang out.. that THESE MEN will read this as "advertising"...that -this one over here is ready and willing, she's looking for some action... Is that so radical ? *They are thinking with the mind of the perpetrador...which is already "twisted" and set on evil..*.


It's seen as "advertising" because we grow up learning that that is what it is. If some guy is drunk, dressed in only a speedo and dancing in the street and another guy goes out and shoots him would anyone say he is to blame because he was drunk? Probably not. No one teaches men how to avoid getting shot. If you don't want to get shot you don't do this or that or the other thing. And if you don't do those things it is entirely your fault because you didn't take the precautions and limit your agency to avoid getting shot. How many men are shot in the United States? Yet we never hear a story about how men should avoid getting shot and these are the precautions you need to take to avoid getting shot.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Pooh Bear said:


> You can't necessarily tell a rapist by just looking at him or avoiding certain places or situations. Most rapes are acquitance rapes. Men who rape can be very charming. Or deceptive. You go in to a bar for a drink and a guy drugs your drink. Heck, look at Bill Cosby. These women were interested in help with their careers and he would drug their drink or convince them to take a pill. I mean if you someone you admire or are a little intimidated by says, here this will help with your headache, would you refuse? No one would think Bill Cosby is a rapist. He doesn't look like a rapist right? But yet we blame the women. I am not saying that it is ok to try to take all the precautions you can. But sometimes we cannot forsee, depending on our experiences. And even if we don't take precautions ultimately the onus is on the rapist, right? Why would anyone choose to rape? Why would anyone take advantage of someone for not taking a precaution? If you are walking down the street at 2am why am I entitled to attack you? By saying that women should be taking precautions we are saying that the rapist's action is all right. He is entitled to rape if you do not do x, y, and z.


Come on Pooh Bear, give me a little credit.. . I KNEW this was coming after my post.. it always does.. women feel this need to inform me after I mention Bars are not a wise place to hang out, all the stories of Grandma getting raped in her home, or a relative..

I am very aware that MOST rapes are by those we KNOW, in our own lives.. a family member, a BF even...or someone we'd least expect...

My Best friends 2 daughters were molested, she has a book on Amazon....where her daughter was drawing pictures with locks on her mouth ... in relation to her Uncle touching her... .. it was ME who told her to NEVER allow her daughters to spend the night at that Uncles house.. as she heard some things from his past, but figured "OH he's better now" as her sister married him.. well she learned the hard way.. 

Anytime women are dealing with a powerful man, a Boss, he could be trying to manipulate, use this power.. just further of a need to be cautious..which is my whole point here.


----------



## ConanHub

People who decide to harm others will always choose someone they perceive to be weaker. Basic predator behavior. A predator does not want to be harmed.

Women are far easier targets than men. They need equipped to deal with this reality. 

Weaker appearing men are more prone to be attacked than strong.

I don't think this applies to M/W but is interesting none the less.


----------



## Pooh Bear

SimplyAmorous said:


> Come on Pooh Bear, give me a little credit.. . I KNEW this was coming after my post.. it always does.. women feel this need to inform me after I mention Bars are not a wise place to hang out, all the stories of Grandma getting raped in her home, or a relative..
> 
> I am very aware that MOST rapes are by those we KNOW, in our own lives.. a family member, a BF even...or someone we'd least expect...
> 
> My Best friends 2 daughters were molested, she has a book on Amazon....where her daughter was drawing pictures with locks on her mouth ... in relation to her Uncle touching her... .. it was ME who told her to NEVER allow her daughters to spend the night at that Uncles house.. as she heard some things from his past, but figured "OH he's better now" as her sister married him.. well she learned the hard way..
> 
> Anytime women are dealing with a powerful man, a Boss, he could be trying to manipulate, use this power.. just further of a need to be cautious..which is my whole point here.


Do you teach your daughters that rape is not their fault? That they should be careful, yes, but that if all else fails and they are raped anyway it is not their fault.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Pooh Bear said:


> Do you teach your daughters that rape is not their fault? That they should be careful, yes, but that if all else fails and they are raped anyway it is not their fault.


 You must really entertain the worst of me to ask such a question.. what do you think ? Do you have any idea how ANGRY I would be or MY HUSBAND ...*the rage*/ helplessness he would feel if this happened to her.. I am very careful to where she goes, who she is with.. I WANT TO KNOW about people's history, reputation... same thing for when she goes with a young man someday..

I want to make sure every stone is overturned so she will live as good of a life as possible.. to avoid something like that happening.. but I am a Realist..

SH** happens every day... just her going off to college someday will raise this risk Triple fold ... ....of course I would NEVER blame her.. but if she did something "not taking precautions" where I/we felt it could have been avoided.. do you really think I am going to tie my mouth shut here.. 

There will likely be a few words at some point AFTER we've been there for her/ supporting her .. speaking of the lesson learned.. and I don't feel that is wrong either.. while we do what we have to do -to rectify the situation.. pressing charges, whatever it is...

I just hope we never see that day.


----------



## Pooh Bear

SimplyAmorous said:


> You must really entertain the worst of me to ask such a question.. what do you think ? Do you have any idea how ANGRY I would be or MY HUSBAND ...*the rage*/ helplessness he would feel if this happened to her.. I am very careful to where she goes, who she is with.. I WANT TO KNOW about people's history, reputation... same thing for when she goes with a young man someday..
> 
> I want to make sure every stone is overturned so she will live as good of a life as possible.. to avoid something like that happening.. but I am a Realist..
> 
> SH** happens every day... just her going off to college someday will raise this risk Triple fold +... ....of course I would NEVER blame her.. but if she did something stupid where I/we felt it could have been avoided.. do you really think I am going to tie my mouth shut here..
> 
> There will likely be a few words at some time after we'd been there for her.. speaking of the lesson learned.. and I don't feel that is wrong either.. while we do what we have to do -to rectify the situation.. pressing charges, whatever it is...
> 
> I just hope we never see that day.


I hope your daughter never experiences that either. 

Honestly, SimplyAmorous, I wouldn't talk to you about a rape. Because I would feel like you are blaming me for it. This is why women don't come forward when they are raped. Then when they finally do come forward, people demand to know why they didn't come forward originally.


----------



## Pooh Bear

SimplyAmorous said:


> Well that's a slap across the face. I am speechless..


I'm sorry. It's true.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Pooh Bear said:


> I'm sorry. It's true.


I appreciate honesty.. I don't feel I am heartless or difficult to talk too though, never been accused of that in real life in any way.. but it's how you see it .. it is what it is...I will pick up my bags and exit this discussion.


----------



## Maricha75

SimplyAmorous said:


> I appreciate honesty.. *I don't feel I am heartless or difficult to talk too though, never been accused of that in real life in any way*.. but it's how you see it .. it is what it is...I will pick up my bags and exit this discussion.


You're not, SA. Not even a little bit. Personally, I saw nothing wrong with what you said, AT ALL.


----------



## ConanHub

intheory said:


> Yes, they do.
> 
> I mean, I'm talking about the "Friday the 13th" genre. Especially the early ones.
> 
> The mouthy, confident girl who has sex early on; she is a goner. Of course the guy she is with will usually get killed too.
> 
> The girl that survives against all odds, is going to be the girl who doesn't have sex with anyone.
> 
> I discovered this myself. At first, I thought I was imagining it. Then I watched more critically; and I saw it happen over and over again.


If I was to look at it from a gender point of view, I would say that that genre had a distinct female bias.

Most or all of the men were killed or taken out of action and were often portrayed as inept and stupid. Whoever had sex was killed. I agree that the screen shots and script emphasized the female but that could be to exploit her vulnerability.

The "good" girl usually did become the sole survivor or the last one killed but it usually was a female that survived the longest or defeated the monster. I am hard pressed, when thinking of that genre, to remember male superiority against whatever threatened. I am so stimulated by this conversation that I am now going to research this and see how beta or alpha males were represented and everyone in between.

Thanks for this line of thought! It is really fun!:smthumbup:


----------



## always_alone

SimplyAmorous said:


> We have 5 sons ... I am most definitely more worried about my daughter, none of our sons have cell phones, but when she starts hanging around town with friends, you better believe she will have one.. I don't see anything wrong with being more concerned for THE FEMALE, she is the weaker sex physically ...it's so obvious.. Men do more brutal crimes over women, more RAPE, more killings.. this is all just pure and simple common sense to me.
> 
> I do not understand for the life of me, why women get upset over this .. I just can't relate . I am happy there are good men , like our Fathers, our friends who will teach us to be careful ...


SA, there is absolutely nothing wrong with teaching people to be careful, to learn how to be attentive to their surroundings, to read social cues, to defend oneself, to avoid situations that don't feel right.

Where the problem lies is that this often ends up translating into basically putting a cage around women, simply because they are women. So you can't go out by yourself, you can't enjoy parties, you can't travel, and on and on it goes.

And while it's true that on average women are physically weaker, I don't think the best solution is to put her in a plastic bubble for protection, reducing her chances for doing extraordinary things or having the opportunity for adventure. This to my mind is a step backwards, and the better solution is to give her the tools she needs to stay safe, without having to just not do what boys always feel perfectly free to do.

Let's remember that men are raped too, in surprisingly large numbers, and can be beaten up, taken advantage of, and come to all sorts of harm.



SimplyAmorous said:


> If the men are giving these examples, which is a new one to me...this is what I see- *from THEIR END (don't judge me for this)*..... they are trying to tell you (with puffed up exaggeration of course)....that these unscrupulous men (representing the BAD part of Detroit)..that yes... when they see a woman dressed provocatively, or whatever she is doing ...dancing, getting drunk, flirting, letting it all hang out.. that THESE MEN will read this as "advertising"...that -this one over here is ready and willing, she's looking for some action... Is that so radical ? *They are thinking with the mind of the perpetrador...which is already "twisted" and set on evil..*.


And so why do we always have to imagine that a woman who is out and about at night or at a bar on her own is dressed like a total slvt, drunkenly wagging her t*ts in every man's face? This automatic equation of women acting independently with crazy drunk sloppy *****s staggering around in stilettos and microminis is exactly the issue here. I have, for example, gone into a bar alone on many occasions, to have a glass, maybe some food, and I will be wearing very ordinary street clothes, and more often than not, I won't even speak to anyone but the wait-staff and cashiers. 

Do these men who are supposedly concerned for my safety imagine a bar full of "perpetrators"?


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening all
Important concept:If someone harms you, it is not your fault, however that doesn't not mean that you should not take steps to avoid that harm. And failing to take those steps still does NOT make it your fault.

If someone robs my house, it is not my fault. Still, I would be wise to lock the doors. If I forget to lock the door, it is not my fault if I am robbed - it is still the fault of the thief.

Women can take actions to reduce the chance that they are raped. It is up to the individual if they choose to take those actions, and if they do not, it is still not their fault if they are raped.


----------



## EleGirl

SimplyAmorous said:


> Why can't it be chalked up to being *safety conscious.*..some of us are not risk takers, does that make us BAD people & we should tie our mouths shut.. when we have an opinion, lest it offend someone...
> 
> Why does it have to be a gender thing at all ?
> 
> Dad&Hubby responded to my post that he would also warn his wife to NOT go out in the middle of the night... I almost responded to that yesterday...that although my H isn't much for starting conflict... he would over something like that !.. *because he cares about me*, and my safety.. he doesn't TRUST other people ...even the smallest risks *...we consider them*.. that's just a part of who we are...how we live.
> 
> But really.... Why would I NOT want this.. I love this about him!
> 
> Where you jump to judgement, I see something completely different... that He's looking out for me .. and I am looking out for my friend..
> 
> It's really difficult to talk to people anymore if everything we say is taken with some gender bias attached to it..
> 
> I was one who listened to my elders when I was younger.. Gawd I must be so B O R I N G ... I don't handle bad things happening well.. I'd be so pi$$ed off* at myself* for putting myself in a bad situation.. it just wouldn't be good. If others don't mind that sort of Fall out and the risks are worth the possible danger.. that's well & good.. it's your life..
> 
> I just have a different mindset on it..
> 
> How about this one. we've never used a ATM in our lives. never wanted that feature.. not worth the small risk of someone robbing us -anytime, didn't want the extra fees.. so I better always have $$ on hand.. that is one way to avoid the issue altogether... I find that much easier .


But you see, what you are describing is your life. No one here is saying that there is anything wrong with your life. No one says that it's not ok for your husband to be concerned about you. So why do you post as though anyone is attacking you or your life? 



SimplyAmorous said:


> was one who listened to my elders when I was younger.. Gawd I must be so B O R I N G ... I don't handle bad things happening well.. I'd be so pi$$ed off at myself for putting myself in a bad situation.. it just wouldn't be good. If others don't mind that sort of Fall out and the risks are worth the possible danger.. that's well & good.. it's your life..


That's your life. Not everyone has the same life you do. Some of us have to do things that you seem to consider a risk. We are living in different circumstances. If you were living in my circumstances, you just might do the same things I do.

For example, you have a husband who supports you and your children financially. I don't. I've never had that. It was not my choice that it turned out like this. It just did.

So when I had to support my children I had to work the hours that I had to work. When my job called for me to work late nights to get a product ready for delivery, I was the only person who could do it. So I've had to work late many nights. And when I work late, I have to walk across a dark parking lot. Sometimes nights I had to stop at a gas station late at night so I could get home. I have to drive down dark streets. If my car were to break down, well I'm on my own. 

For anyone to say that me, as a woman, doing something I have to do is "equivalent of walking through the worst neighborhood of Detroit waving fistfulls of dollars".. just because I'm a woman is just pure nonsense.

Why does it have to be about gender at all? Well that's the question, isn't it? Why is it about gender? Men go out at night all the time. No one tells them that it's too dangerous for them to go out by themselves at night.

Do you worry about your husband when he has to go out at night? Do you say the same things to him when he has to?

It's about gender because people make it about gender.


----------



## EleGirl

Pooh Bear said:


> You can't necessarily tell a rapist by just looking at him or avoiding certain places or situations. Most rapes are acquitance rapes. Men who rape can be very charming. Or deceptive. You go in to a bar for a drink and a guy drugs your drink. Heck, look at Bill Cosby. These women were interested in help with their careers and he would drug their drink or convince them to take a pill. I mean if you someone you admire or are a little intimidated by says, here this will help with your headache, would you refuse? No one would think Bill Cosby is a rapist. He doesn't look like a rapist right? But yet we blame the women. I am not saying that it is ok to try to take all the precautions you can. But sometimes we cannot forsee, depending on our experiences. And even if we don't take precautions ultimately the onus is on the rapist, right? Why would anyone choose to rape? Why would anyone take advantage of someone for not taking a precaution? If you are walking down the street at 2am why am I entitled to attack you? By saying that women should be taking precautions we are saying that the rapist's action is all right. He is entitled to rape if you do not do x, y, and z.


This above is a very important point that is usually missed. 

A woman is less likely to be raped hanging out in a bar and even getting drunk there, than she is to get raped in her own home or in the home of a close friend or family member.

Only 10% of rapes are stranger rapes. Very few rapes happen because a woman gets dunk in a bar or because she's standing around near men that look like sleaze bags.

She's most likely to be raped by someone she knows and trusts... in a safe place like her own home .

Yet when rape comes up, the topic goes immediately to women in bars, having drinks, walking down a "dangerous" street, etc.


----------



## EleGirl

SimplyAmorous said:


> If the men are giving these examples, which is a new one to me...this is what I see- *from THEIR END (don't judge me for this)*..... they are trying to tell you (with puffed up exaggeration of course)....that these unscrupulous men (representing the BAD part of Detroit)..that yes... when they see a woman dressed provocatively, or whatever she is doing ...dancing, getting drunk, flirting, letting it all hang out.. that THESE MEN will read this as "advertising"...that -this one over here is ready and willing, she's looking for some action... Is that so radical ? *They are thinking with the mind of the perpetrador...which is already "twisted" and set on evil..*.


That comment was not in response to a woman acting in any way that you describe here. So why are you now taking it from the original scenario and turning it into that the guy was warning women to not get drunk, dress provocatively, looking for action, etc?


----------



## EleGirl

This thread is getting off track again. Just about every time there is a thread on here about some issue related to women.. the ends up turning into a discussion of rape.

And it ends up being about how women put themselves in danger by going out alone, dressed like slvts, getting drunk, yada yada.

It would be good to get back to the topic of the thread and not have it turn into yet one more argument about whether or not women are responsible for being raped.


----------



## EleGirl

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening all
> Important concept:If someone harms you, it is not your fault, however that doesn't not mean that you should not take steps to avoid that harm. And failing to take those steps still does NOT make it your fault.
> 
> If someone robs my house, it is not my fault. Still, I would be wise to lock the doors. If I forget to lock the door, it is not my fault if I am robbed - it is still the fault of the thief.
> 
> Women can take actions to reduce the chance that they are raped. It is up to the individual if they choose to take those actions, and if they do not, it is still not their fault if they are raped.


There is not one person on this thread saying that women should not take precautions. No one is suggesting that women should go out, dressed like floozies, get drunk, etc etc etc.

So why is that even being discussed?


----------



## TiggyBlue

Being a early developer was enough to give me the label slapper (or sl*t) by some.


----------



## EleGirl

TiggyBlue said:


> Being and early developer was enough to give me the label slapper (or sl*t) by some.


Yep.. this post brings it back to mind.... I also developed early. Being big chested in the 6th grade is not a good thing.


----------



## Pooh Bear

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening all
> Important concept:If someone harms you, it is not your fault, however that doesn't not mean that you should not take steps to avoid that harm. And failing to take those steps still does NOT make it your fault.
> 
> If someone robs my house, it is not my fault. Still, I would be wise to lock the doors. If I forget to lock the door, it is not my fault if I am robbed - it is still the fault of the thief.
> 
> Women can take actions to reduce the chance that they are raped. It is up to the individual if they choose to take those actions, and if they do not, it is still not their fault if they are raped.


Yes. Thank you, Richard. That is what I am saying.


----------



## Pooh Bear

TiggyBlue said:


> Being a early developer was enough to give me the label slapper (or sl*t) by some.


Yeah. That's pretty terrible.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

EleGirl said:


> But you see, what you are describing is your life. No one here is saying that there is anything wrong with your life. No one says that it's not ok for your husband to be concerned about you. *So why do you post as though anyone is attacking you or your life? *


 I was responding to Always Alone's post....and I give her a lot of credit as she was very gracious and understanding in her replies to me. I did not feel attacked, I was offering a counter view.. As if you wouldn't do the same Elegirl ...you are pretty good at that yourself.... 

It was the same thing Always Alone was doing too....I don't fault anyone for that, or point them out ... We all do.. it's the nature of forum discussion. 



> That's your life. Not everyone has the same life you do. Some of us have to do things that you seem to consider a risk. We are living in different circumstances. If you were living in my circumstances, you just might do the same things I do.


 so I should never offer an opinion.. is that it? I thought TAM was an equal opportunity / all is welcome place to post.. with a wide variety of experiences and views.. 

Elegirl, I rub you the wrong way in it seems so many things I say... you've already let me know I am compassionless , now you have Pooh Bear backing you up with other likes of the women here.... a # of times you have pointed out how UNRELATABLE I am to other women....mentioning my life as though it is perfect..... *basically you are trying to tell me I don't belong here and I need to shut the F up*.. *I get it*.

If there was some way I could make every keystroke I type invincible *to you* & a handful of others here.. well I just wish I could.



> For example, you have a husband who supports you and your children financially. I don't. I've never had that. It was not my choice that it turned out like this. It just did.
> 
> So when I had to support my children I had to work the hours that I had to work. When my job called for me to work late nights to get a product ready for delivery, I was the only person who could do it. So I've had to work late many nights. And when I work late,* I have to walk across a dark parking lot. Sometimes nights I had to stop at a gas station late at night so I could get home. I have to drive down dark streets. If my car were to break down, well I'm on my own*.


 and I posted on Anon07's thread about just that..her walking to her car late at night in a dark parking lot.. many of us felt it was a safety concern, that a fellow employee could be watching out or she should carry mace, a siren.....

Married woman ARE in this situation too.. For a car breaking down, thank God for AAA ... we have it.. my H can't leave work to help me if I break down. He's busy laying under a train somewhere.....his Boss would probably deduct a day of wages to do that..



> For anyone to say that me, as a woman, doing something I have to do is "equivalent of walking through the worst neighborhood of Detroit waving fistfulls of dollars".. just because I'm a woman is just pure nonsense.


 I said I felt the men was speaking through the eyes of a predator..Just so you know , I have never talked like that, never even heard that expression before this thread . 



> Why does it have to be about gender at all? Well that's the question, isn't it? Why is it about gender? Men go out at night all the time. No one tells them that it's too dangerous for them to go out by themselves at night.
> 
> *Do you worry about your husband when he has to go out at night? Do you say the same things to him when he has to?*


Yes I do worry...and we've talked about that WORRY.... he has worked the midnight shift where BUMS can be around the corner, and he's all alone...he could be knocked out & someone find him dead the next morning.... he prefers to work during the day..and thankfully has that option... he's not muscular, not one to take down a big guy....so if he was met with a dangerous situation, he's better off with some form of protection.. We speak on these things. Yes.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

intheory said:


> Pooh Bear looks at this through the lens of what should be. *What is ideal.* And I agree with that. Hard to disagree.
> 
> *Simply Amorous has more of an actual reality perspective. Ideals are great; but that's not how the world works. So, do what it takes to protect yourself. *
> 
> If you drop your wallet somewhere; anyone who finds it should turn it in; without stealing anything from you. And that does happen sometimes. But, I wouldn't count on it.
> 
> *I'm pretty sure Simply Amorous is very, very hurt by the suggestion that she wouldn't be super loving and caring if (God forbid) her daughter was sexually assaulted. I think anyone who has read her posts for even a short amount of time knows that she lives for her family, and their well being.
> 
> And I can't imagine SA showing up at the emergency room; and the first thing out of her mouth to her daughter is "What were you doing at the frat party?", or the like*.


 Thank you Intheory... I really appreciate your taking the time to say what you said here... that you give me the benefit of the doubt ... Yes, those things hurt that others see me so _________. 

When my Gf's daughters were molested, it was myself & H that they poured out their agony/ the powerlessness they felt...we sat with them..... her H wanted to go kill that Uncle, we had to talk him down.. I would even be afraid of my own reaction if this happened.. god forbid if she was almost killed/ left disabled or something , I think I might kill the S of a B.. and destroy my own life, and our families.... Something like that could make me Loose control I think.. which is not a nice thing to admit.. It's something else I never want to see.. 

So feeling I am doing all I can to prevent , to minimize...and that our children do as well.. gives me some sense of peace in a cold unforgiving world. 



> *I think (just guessing) she means that with time; she would probably try to talk to her daughter gently about how to avoid something like that ever happening again. And would do everything in her power to get her daughter healthy and confident again.*


 Yes *in TIME*.. you have read me in the spirit it was intended.. and it's very true, I am much more of a Realist over an Idealist....always have been, I guess it has something to do with our personalities, I don't know..


----------



## Cletus

EleGirl said:


> Why does it have to be about gender at all? Well that's the question, isn't it? Why is it about gender? Men go out at night all the time. No one tells them that it's too dangerous for them to go out by themselves at night.


Someone probably should, since men are overall the victim of a violent crime in the U.S. more often than women.


----------



## Cletus

SimplyAmorous said:


> Yes *in TIME*.. you have read me in the spirit it was intended.. and it's very true, I am much more of a Realist over an Idealist....always have been, I guess it has something to do with our personalities, I don't know..


There's plenty of place in the world for the realists.


----------



## Wolf1974

Cletus said:


> Someone probably should, since men are overall the victim of a violent crime in the U.S. more often than women.


This is correct thanks for posting it before me

It's a pretty silly argument anyway. I worry about my daughters. I would worry about my sons. I worry in the same way that they would put themselves in stupid situations. Specifics of the situations matter little. I would worry.


----------



## FrenchFry

TiggyBlue said:


> Being a early developer was enough to give me the label slapper (or sl*t) by some.


This was how Rebecca got her title originally.


----------



## FrenchFry

:rofl: Oh, my. Before coffee posting. Rebecca is the girl who I hung out with to get my **** title at 13. She developed early which is how she got her title.


----------



## Pooh Bear

*…now you have Pooh Bear backing you up with other likes of the women here*

SimplyAmorous, EleGirl and I are two different people. I disagree with you on this is all. I am a rape survivor myself and after it happened, I blamed myself. I went to a therapist for something completely unrelated to the rape and I told her about it. She said, it wasn’t your fault. That was the first time it occurred to me that it wasn’t my fault. I think while we are talking to girls about precautions we need to make it clear that if they don’t work, rape is still not their fault. We also can't live in a bubble because of fear of rape. We need to be able to live full lives.

*basically you are trying to tell me I don't belong here and I need to shut the F up.. I get it.*

I doubt that is what EleGirl is saying and I certainly don’t want you to leave the conversation.


----------



## Maricha75

TiggyBlue said:


> Being a early developer was enough to give me the label slapper (or sl*t) by some.


I, too, developed early. I got no such title. My cousin, however, got the title. Not because she developed early, but because of her actions. She had sex with any guy willing... SHE approached THEM, from the time she was 13 or 14. Funny thing about that. I had friends who were "bad girls". Not once did anyone even remotely consider that I was like that. I was the "good girl" in the group. If anything, I was the one who made them look "better" :rofl:


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Pooh Bear said:


> *…now you have Pooh Bear backing you up with other likes of the women here*
> 
> SimplyAmorous, EleGirl and I are two different people. I disagree with you on this is all. I am a rape survivor myself and after it happened, I blamed myself. I went to a therapist for something completely unrelated to the rape and I told her about it. She said, it wasn’t your fault. That was the first time it occurred to me that it wasn’t my fault. I think while we are talking to girls about precautions we need to make it clear that if they don’t work, rape is still not their fault. We also can't live in a bubble because of fear of rape. We need to be able to live full lives.


 and I agree with you... just because I hone on on being cautious doesn't = the other.. why wouldn't I be offended that others assume that is does. That's what you are all speaking.. is it NOT?? and let's face it, if that's what you do see.. I am ****ing scum of the earth.. It's oK.. that's how you feel... lay it out there, I'm like the Mother who attaches to some abuser man , then takes his word over her own children.... 



> *basically you are trying to tell me I don't belong here and I need to shut the F up.. I get it.*
> 
> I doubt that is what EleGirl is saying and I certainly don’t want you to leave the conversation.


 You can think what you will... she is quick to point out how something is MY LIFE and it's NOT others..this has happened a # of times on a # of threads...I may be many things but I'm not stupid... if this is not intended to shut someone down... I'd like to know what purpose that serves?? 

She has told me she feels I am compassion-less as well... I am not pulling this out of thin air.. so I disagree ...

Hey, that's life.... we're not all going to like each other.

Carry on ladies ...


----------



## SimplyAmorous

> *Pooh Bear said*:* I am a rape survivor myself and after it happened, I blamed myself. I went to a therapist for something completely unrelated to the rape and I told her about it. She said, it wasn’t your fault. That was the first time it occurred to me that it wasn’t my fault.*


 I don't know how common this is.. to feel this way..after a Rape.. I can only imagine the screaming of emotions on many fronts to it.. how angry , violated, humiliated, the loss of control, the forced violation... and all that comes ...wanting to wash it all -if that could be done.....it would slice like a knife for someone to suggest you asked for it.. is there any understanding in that ? NO!...then you suddenly realize there is no one there for you, you feel more alone than ever in your life... you try to carry it .... 

But it's something that *needs* talked about.. to release all that you are carrying... Thankfully this woman was Kind... something in you allowed yourself to TRUST HER ... You were met with understanding arms ... all rape survivors need just that for healing. I believe I understand this.. 

It's ALWAYS the actions, the fault, the twisted mind of the Perpetrator in an act of selfish aggression, Rage, LUST...

My own Mother was raped 3 times... I doubt she had any therapy for it.. it wasn't in childhood.. she did feel her choices invited the wrong men into her life though.. She herself has said this *to me*.. .. hers is a story where she married an Alcoholic and he would invite men off the streets to stay with them..

At one point they shared their apartment with a Murderer.. he killed his GF one night, came home & stole the sandwich from her mouth & the cops were at the door..

Many of my views is in repulsion to the terrible life she has lived....Frankly I'd rather take a gun to my head. DO I expect others to understand this.. probably not...when we're faced with extremes, it has a way of having us do an about face in the opposite direction. 

I can see why feel as you do with any HINT of another judging.. I would hope we all TRY To understand each situation and treat it tenderly.. but I'm also not against some "tough love"...when the timing is right, when it's called for.


----------



## EleGirl

Cletus said:


> Someone probably should, since men are overall the victim of a violent crime in the U.S. more often than women.


You are right about this. Men (the violent ones) victimize other men at a very high rate. it's truly shocking.

When my sons were growing up we talked a lot about this. I talked to them a lot about situations to avoid; that they need to leave a situation the moment things look like they are getting out of hand, etc.


----------



## EleGirl

SimplyAmorous said:


> so I should never offer an opinion.. is that it? I thought TAM was an equal opportunity / all is welcome place to post.. with a wide variety of experiences and views..


No one is saying that you should not offer a different opinion. I was simply offering a point of view that is different from yours. Are you telling me that I cannot respond with a different opinion to yours? Because it sounds like you are.

My post was an attempt to expand on the fact that not every woman has the same circumstances. Some women have life circumstances require that they do things that differ from your circumstance. In your posts, you seem to think that women are purposely putting themselves at risk and making bad choices. You do not seem to understand that many of us have little choice but to do thing that you consider foolish, like working late and walking to our car at night.

You often bring up women going to bars, dressing like floozies, getting drunk and then getting raped. Not one woman on here has advocated that any women should do this. Not one woman has suggested that this is a good idea. Yet that is the scenario you always bring up. This thread is NOT ABOUT RAPE. Yet it’s being made about rape.

This thread is about women and their experience with the M/H thing. It’s about slvt shaming being used when women have done nothing to bring that on to themselves. Why is this topic being turned into a discussion of rape? Why was rape even brought up?


It’s not an attack on you. My post was to expand on the truth that women often do not have the choice about things like working late, working to their car late at night, things like that. Why are you so offended by my bringing this up?



SimplyAmorous said:


> When you respond to a different opinion with things like “so I should never offer an opinion.. is that it?” and “*basically you are trying to tell me I don't belong here and I need to shut the F up*.. *I get it*.”


No one, certainly not me, is telling to you shut up. If anyone posts something here, they can pretty much expect that someone while respond in one way or the other. If feel that the above quote is an attempt to get me to shut the f up. If people cannot reply to your posts except in glowing agreement, then what’s the point of a discussion?
I agree with you that women should be careful and think about risk in everything that they do. I also think that men should. There are many situations in which men are at very high risk. But I think that there is much more to consider. Part of what needs to be considered is that people have to also be able to live their lives, support their families, etc. If that includes walking to their car late at night in an empty parking lot.. well that’s what they have to do. It’s called life and being responsible.




SimplyAmorous said:


> Elegirl, I rub you the wrong way in it seems so many things I say... you've already let me know I am compassionless , now you have Pooh Bear backing you up with other likes of the women here.... a # of times you have pointed out how UNRELATABLE I am to other women....mentioning my life as though it is perfect..... *basically you are trying to tell me I don't belong here and I need to shut the F up*.. *I get it*.


Pooh Bear and I are not backing each other up. That would require that we PM’ed each other and plotted to attack you. That’s ridiculous to even suggest.

No I’m not telling that you do not belong here. While I understand your point of view and where you are coming from, I don’t think that you understand the reality of what the lives are like for a lot of women. If you did, you would not constantly use the example of women going to bars, dressing like slvts, getting drunk, etc. as something that we should not be doing. You would not be using that to explain how we should not be putting ourselves at risk. Because 99% of us don’t do that. Why not talk about the reality of what most of us are doing.


SimplyAmorous said:


> Why can't it be chalked up to being *safety conscious.*..some of us are not risk takers, does that make us BAD people & we should tie our mouths shut.. when we have an opinion, lest it offend someone...


Why do you assume we are not being safety conscious within the parameters of the lives we have?

No one is saying that being cautious/conscious makes you or anyone a BAD person. Why do you assume that you are the only one here who is being cautious/conscious? We all are. You are the only one who seems to think that most of us are not. Why do you have to tell us to not go to bars and get drunk? We are not doing that.

You have taken a discussion about how the M/H thing affects women and turned it into a discussion of how you are different than most of us because you are cautious/conscious and would never go out to a bar by yourself, get drunk etc and thus get raped. What does this have to even do with the topic of this thread?


SimplyAmorous said:


> Many things didn't have to happen (take heed!)....... but apparently this is unacceptable to speak out of our mouths or we are suddenly "victim blaming"..


Again this has nothing to do with the topic of M/H. But since you bring it up, do you really think that I’m so stupid that I don’t know this? Why do you think I and every other woman here does not know this already?


SimplyAmorous said:


> If there was some way I could make every keystroke I type invincible *to you* & a handful of others here.. well I just wish I could.


I am sorry that you are not open to hearing my point of view and discussing both yours and mine with me. It’s sad but that’s your choice. There is a way for you to shut me up and make me and others whose points of view you want to shut out… you can block us. Please do block me if I have such strong feelings about allowing my point of view.

QUOTE=SimplyAmorous;11754298]and I posted on Anon07's thread about just that..her walking to her car late at night in a dark parking lot.. many of us felt it was a safety concern, that a fellow employee could be watching out or she should carry mace, a siren..... [/QUOTE]
Yea I think I posted on that thread too. When I was a teen I did the safe thing.. I let my brother’s friend walk be home. After all that’s the safe thing to do right… not walk alone in the dark? He pulled me into a field and raped me. See how that works out. I learned a long time ago that having some guy walk me to my car, my home, etc. was a very nice way to give him a clear way to rape. 

Mace and a siren might help. Where I walk to my car when I work late, a siren will not work. It’s in the middle of nowhere. The closed house is about half a mile away. Now there is a guard shack with 2 men in it. They are not allowed to walk anyone to their car. The security of the facility is more important. But I do hope that they are watching.


----------



## norajane

Wow, this thread has gotten far, far away from Madonna/Wh*re complex. Rape? Violence against men? All that's missing is sexless marriages and walkaway wives, everything but the subject of who might have experienced or been impacted by M/W complex.


----------



## Starstarfish

When I was in school, there were only two potions - Sl*T and Lesbian. If you had sex, wanted sex, talked about sex, considered sex, or even knew about sex, you were a sl*t. If you dressed slim-fitting, low-cut, or short - you were a sl*t.

If you didn't want sex, wouldn't talk about sex, and generally weren't interested, you were obviously a lesbian. If you dressed tomboyish, or figure neutral, you were a lesbian. Assigned male roles in English class because the guys in your class were too dumb - lesbian. Don't find the appropriate popular guys hot - lesbian.

No middle ground, no exceptions. 

I stopped worrying about it after a while, and wore my Doc Martin's with pride.


----------



## Ynot

norajane said:


> Wow, this thread has gotten far, far away from Madonna/Wh*re complex. Rape? Violence against men? All that's missing is sexless marriages and walkaway wives, everything but the subject of who might have experienced or been impacted by M/W complex.


Going off on tangents is one of the things I usually notice on these longer threads, but that is what having a discussion is all about. You can learn a lot and find a lot to think about by following a thread. I stopped reading on page 8 and skipped to the end. Now I am curious about all that I missed in between.


----------



## Cletus

Starstarfish said:


> No middle ground, no exceptions.
> 
> I stopped worrying about it after a while, and wore my Doc Martin's with pride.


So every single guy in the school categorized you as one or the other? No exceptions? Or is this just being a little bit hyperbolic?


----------



## that.girl

Starstarfish said:


> When I was in school, there were only two potions - Sl*T and Lesbian. If you had sex, wanted sex, talked about sex, considered sex, or even knew about sex, you were a sl*t. If you dressed slim-fitting, low-cut, or short - you were a sl*t.
> 
> If you didn't want sex, wouldn't talk about sex, and generally weren't interested, you were obviously a lesbian. If you dressed tomboyish, or figure neutral, you were a lesbian. Assigned male roles in English class because the guys in your class were too dumb - lesbian. Don't find the appropriate popular guys hot - lesbian.
> 
> No middle ground, no exceptions.
> 
> I stopped worrying about it after a while, and wore my Doc Martin's with pride.


I got tagged as a lesbian too!

I was smart, sarcastic, and just a little bit weird. Guys were intimidated by me, so i didn't really date. 

They started calling me a lesbian freshman year, and i never could shake the label off. And after that rumor started circulating, i REALLY couldn't get a date, which they just used as proof for their point.

I'm not a Doc Marten fan, but I refuse to be ashamed of my motorcycle boots and love for video games.


----------



## Anonymous07

Starstarfish said:


> When I was in school, there were only two potions - Sl*T and Lesbian. If you had sex, wanted sex, talked about sex, considered sex, or even knew about sex, you were a sl*t. If you dressed slim-fitting, low-cut, or short - you were a sl*t.
> 
> If you didn't want sex, wouldn't talk about sex, and generally weren't interested, you were obviously a lesbian. If you dressed tomboyish, or figure neutral, you were a lesbian. Assigned male roles in English class because the guys in your class were too dumb - lesbian. Don't find the appropriate popular guys hot - lesbian.
> 
> No middle ground, no exceptions.
> 
> I stopped worrying about it after a while, and wore my Doc Martin's with pride.


I had people question my sexuality in high school because I didn't sleep around, but the label didn't stick for what ever reason. They just viewed me as weird/nerdy/tomboyish, so I guess I was never pined after. It was completely different in college though.


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening elegirl
because some poster seem to suggest that suggesting that women take precautions implies that the women are at fault if they are raped. If no one thinks that, then my post was unnecessary. 



EleGirl said:


> There is not one person on this thread saying that women should not take precautions. No one is suggesting that women should go out, dressed like floozies, get drunk, etc etc etc.
> 
> So why is that even being discussed?


----------



## Cletus

that.girl said:


> I got tagged as a lesbian too!


Having been and been around guys in high school, I doubt that they thought you were really a lesbian. 

They were probably just being teenage jackasses. You should hear what we called each other. 

Louis C. K. has a funny bit about the word "***" in one of his routines, and how it doesn't mean homosexual when you use it on your friends.


----------



## SpinDaddy

Starstarfish said:


> When I was in school, there were only two potions - Sl*T and Lesbian. If you had sex, wanted sex, talked about sex, considered sex, or even knew about sex, you were a sl*t. If you dressed slim-fitting, low-cut, or short - you were a sl*t.
> 
> If you didn't want sex, wouldn't talk about sex, and generally weren't interested, you were obviously a lesbian. If you dressed tomboyish, or figure neutral, you were a lesbian. Assigned male roles in English class because the guys in your class were too dumb - lesbian. Don't find the appropriate popular guys hot - lesbian.
> 
> No middle ground, no exceptions.
> 
> I stopped worrying about it after a while, and wore my Doc Martin's with pride.


And the Doc. Martin/Birkenstock girls were the best! Trust me far more “action” in the Model UN, Theatre, and Yearbook/Newspaper circles than there was in the Pom, Dance Line and Cheer circles.


----------



## Starstarfish

> So every single guy in the school categorized you as one or the other? No exceptions? Or is this just being a little bit hyperbolic?


Well, I didn't speak to -every single guy- in my high school. But as long as one single male person disagreed, the rest of the experience is invalid, I get the idea is the point. Women just being hyperbolic and oversensitive again, you should hear how guys talk to each other. Please mansplain my high school experience to me. 

And my high school was beyond anyways. We had a rather high-profile case of a male on male rape and the way people behaved about the whole thing was atrocious. So ... we were kind of a cesspool. 



> Having been and been around guys in high school, I doubt that they thought you were really a lesbian.
> 
> They were probably just being teenage jackasses. You should hear what we called each other.


First - this is why kids behave like that. Because it's always seen in the lens of "it could have been worse."

Do I really think they thought I was a lesbian? No. 

It wasn't about whether they really thought it or not. It was about using labels and social pressure to attempt to get people to fall into a desired mold. The same as the nerd/jock label. High school labels are tropes and usually bad ones at that. 

But they are tropes and jokes that don't really just suddenly disappear when one leaves high school. It's written into jokes, comedies, it's a punch line. Even in a world like Harry Potter, that world makes sense and seems real because it contains the same tropes of people you expect to find - the Know-it-All-Nerd, Mr. Popular, the Poor Kid, Jocks, the Rich Kid.

So did they really think I was a lesbian? No, but it's about peg-holing labels onto people and making assumptions about them once you do, and treating them differently because of it. Which is the core of the M/W complex - there is no grey zone, you are one thing or the other.


----------



## ConanHub

norajane said:


> Wow, this thread has gotten far, far away from Madonna/Wh*re complex. Rape? Violence against men? All that's missing is sexless marriages and walkaway wives, everything but the subject of who might have experienced or been impacted by M/W complex.


Uh.... Yeah...
.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## always_alone

Starstarfish said:


> No middle ground, no exceptions.





SpinDaddy said:


> And the Doc. Martin/Birkenstock girls were the best! Trust me far more “action” in the Model UN, Theatre, and Yearbook/Newspaper circles than there was in the Pom, Dance Line and Cheer circles.


There, see starstarfish, you forgot about all those guys who judge you solely on how much "action" they can get out of you.

Oh, wait...


----------



## Aspydad

SimplyAmorous said:


> Ha ha Elegirl , I knew the "ridiculous" comment was coming... predicted it.. I don't block anyone and I don't plan to block you either, the day posters here get under my skin THAT much is a day I better check myself into the psyche ward.....or sure as Heck leave here...
> 
> You are reading stuff into my posts and taking them just as personal as you think I am... so I guess we're even then , aren't we...
> 
> I flowed into the discussion here no differently than anyone else, I don't think I went off into some tangent as you have tried to paint me doing... but this doesn't surprise me either that you feel this way..
> 
> Look you are a Super intelligent woman who has earned her way and then some.. You are a power horse / a wealth of information WITH ATTACHED EXPERIENCE to offer posters here......you have much to be proud of....and damn have you overcome in life, with the many difficult circumstances you have been faced with..... many women would have CRACKED (and I'd probably be one of them)...
> 
> But you're still here.. kicking... and wanting to give back... while someone like me has lived on Easy street... I know that's how you see me....therefore my opinions are lessor...and probably just a waste.. Don't deny this.. Ok...
> 
> I don't know what to do with that.... apologize...Leave.....shut up.. I haven't lived your life, you haven't lived mine.... Can I just be Me? .. I could ask you why do you take offense, but instead I will just keep responding when I feel misread by you...
> 
> Sometimes I wonder what a waste it really is posting here...it's such a time suck...no one really cares anyway.. we're all the same people when we arrive (same wants, dreams, goals, views, bla bla) as when we type our last post...I'm still going to dislike the bar scene ...you're still going to feel people like me have no clue.. ya know.. it's all so pointless really.
> 
> I really do enjoy debate.. and I also enjoy those who can engage with me -I guess I feel you have made it a little too personal picking on my life being too easy and unrelateable... and yes, this has rubbed me the wrong way.. That's just being honest.


SimplyA,

I for one hope you do keep posting as I do not see your type philosophy on here that much. You have been very successful with the mindset you developed at a very young age with regards to picking who you would marry and for that matter, how you conduct yourself in this world. Very hard to argue with success!!


Call me old fashioned, but I also preach to my two daughters that if you want to marry someone with the intent growing old with this person, that you must be very picky - someone who will not wait until marriage for intercourse = Strike ONE; someone who does not treat you with respect = Strike TWO, and someone who has no self control = Strike Three. There are other things that I have insisted on as well - like how they dress, the places that they go, and even though they are away at college, where they spend the night and what time they get home - I call it BEST PRACTICES. As long as they follow what I have preached to them - their world will be fine - if they decide to ignore me - then, that is the same as saying they are ready to be on their own and as such - all support will cease to exist.

Middle daughter did push the boundaries her first semester. Over Christmas break we had a sit down and I told her if it continues she will experience a life changing event.


----------



## Cletus

Starstarfish said:


> Well, I didn't speak to -every single guy- in my high school. But as long as one single male person disagreed, the rest of the experience is invalid, I get the idea is the point. Women just being hyperbolic and oversensitive again, you should hear how guys talk to each other. Please mansplain my high school experience to me.


Looks like you carry an awful lot of anger around from your high school experience.

I hope you find a way to get over it. It really isn't all that much in the big picture.


----------



## Starstarfish

Hmm.

Or like other women have indicated, sometimes I'd just like something I say to be taken at face value without a man needing to explain "what really happened" or questioning the truth of what I say with noodling it.

So no, Cletus, that post was just for you. The patronizing attitude of this personal response really drove the point home though.

Because if you can't question the truth the next best thing is inferring someone is crazy or has hangups. Obviously that what they say has no merit due to their mental state.


----------



## always_alone

Lila said:


> Virgin/Wh*re is alive and kicking in 2015. No doubt about that.


Absolutely. It only starts in high school, but it gets carried into adulthood. 10 minutes on TAM is all it takes to establish that.


----------



## *LittleDeer*

Aspydad said:


> SimplyA,
> 
> I for one hope you do keep posting as I do not see your type philosophy on here that much. You have been very successful with the mindset you developed at a very young age with regards to picking who you would marry and for that matter, how you conduct yourself in this world. Very hard to argue with success!!
> 
> 
> Call me old fashioned, but I also preach to my two daughters that if you want to marry someone with the intent growing old with this person, that you must be very picky - someone who will not wait until marriage for intercourse = Strike ONE; someone who does not treat you with respect = Strike TWO, and someone who has no self control = Strike Three. There are other things that I have insisted on as well - like how they dress, the places that they go, and even though they are away at college, where they spend the night and what time they get home - I call it BEST PRACTICES. As long as they follow what I have preached to them - their world will be fine - if they decide to ignore me - then, that is the same as saying they are ready to be on their own and as such - all support will cease to exist.
> 
> Middle daughter did push the boundaries her first semester. Over Christmas break we had a sit down and I told her if it continues she will experience a life changing event.


I find this post really disturbing. I guess your daughters will see controlling micro management as love. Lots of abusive men control themselves when they have to. 

I have a daughter who is at university. I don't tell her who to date, how to dress, when to have sex. I am confident that she can handle those decisions herself. I'm not going to control her life until she meets a life partner.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Lila said:


> I have a son and honestly, the only thing I hope and pray for is that he finds happiness in his life. If that girl happens to have a history, then I hope she'll be smart, like I was, and show him all of the wonders a sexually adventurous life has to offer.


Fair enough...of course what brings our sons happiness & faithful fulfillment is the most important ...but one's sexual views it just not a little thing...it's a deep part of who we are and how we look upon love and it's expression... or if it can be separated from love...

If a girl feels that's all well and good, she should be with men who feel the same.. which they are absolutely abundant.. men have an easier time separating love from sex.. 

Some have attempted to explain this... The Truth Behind Why Women Find It Harder To Have Casual Sex Than Men Do



> In her book, “The Female Brain,” Louanne Brizendine writes:
> 
> “Women have an eight lane superhighway for processing emotion, while men have a small country road … Men have the O’Hare Airport hub for processing thoughts about sex, whereas women have the airfield nearby that lands small and private planes.”
> 
> So there you have it: a scientific explanation as to why after sex, women are left wondering if and when she will hear from a guy.


Our sons do not believe in treating women like that, even if they are horny & want to get off.....so Yes I will be most delighted if they find another who holds the special -ness of the act in the same way they do.. 

If they were Playboys, I would feel differently..


----------



## Starstarfish

The issue as has been pointed out that men don't want to marry "girls like that" but expect to transform a virginal bride into a super freak like some Fifty Shades of Grey fantasy. Just like women hope they can will themselves to be turned on by their "safe choice."

If you marry someone who wasn't interested in sex, or was obviously quite willing and able to be without it, it shouldn't be surprising if they might be "LD." If you marry someone who didn't turn you on, don't suddenly expect that will happen.

People can have any expectations (even hypocritical ones) for a partner they want, but if they are hoping marriage will suddenly turn one thing into another, they are setting themselves up for disappointment.


----------



## Marduk

Ah, the "party girl" conundrum.

I've seen this up close and personal a few times, I think there is multiple overlapping things happening, which is why it's so seductive to jump to a one size fits all approach. 

Here's what I see happening with men (at least me) deciding if a very sexually experienced girl can be a LTR partner or not:

1. Basic male insecurity. And don't tell me that women don't have this too. I wouldn't marry an ex porn star, for example, because I would be worried if I could ever "stack up" to the 100s of perfect male bodies with giant genetalia, or having multiple male partners at the same time, that kind of thing. And that one has nothing to do with her, it's on me, but it's a thing.

2. I read a study years ago asserting that people, and particularly women, have trouble making long-term emotional attachments after they've had a lot of partners. I forget the number, and don't have the link so can't support it except to say that the more women I slept with, the more casually I treated it, and wonder if that has an impact in my marriage.

3. Do players actually ever leave the game? That's a big concern. We've all seen plenty of reformed players (men and women) pretend for a given amount of time, and then go back to it. That's a risk. On the flip side, I've seen a few sexually adventurous women shut the taps off on that when they get married, but with a downside: because they're "not that kind of person" any more, they are also "not that kind of person" with their husbands. So that would be another risk.

I'm not saying these are valid concerns, and I'm sure there are more... but these are the kinds of things that come to my mind.

Now, personally, I wouldn't want to marry a totally sexually inexperienced woman either... but that's a different conversation.


----------



## Marduk

Lila said:


> For those that are doubtful or don't believe the Virgin/Wh*re enigma.....there are posts on an active thread on TAM right this minute that perfectly exemplifies it. Here's a quote that was apparently well liked on that thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Virgin/Wh*re is alive and kicking in 2015. No doubt about that.


The point being espoused is a concern if they give up the lifestyle...

Personally I've seen this concern raised as much from women about their ex-player husbands as from women, but we all view the world through our own lens.

This particular one is magnified, I think, by basic male insecurity about themselves and female sexaulity.

But that doesn't mean that it's not a valid concern.


----------



## Adeline

I'm kind of late to the party, plus I only skimmed some of the pages, so here are random thoughts of things that popped in my mind in the little I read:

I also developed early, it was 4th grade that I remember having super noticeable breasts. I don't know why, but I was ashamed. I don't remember anyone making me to feel that way though, i think it was just because i was different than most girls my age and it made me uncomfortable. I mostly wore baggy "unisex" type shirts, and I remember hating wearing a swimsuit and always crossing my arms when i was in one. Then I remember in 5th/6th grade when having a "boyfriend" became more of a thing, and i "dated" 2 boys in the "popular" crowd and girls got nasty. "Why do all the popular guys like her? ew." I wasn't in the "popular" girls group (remember those cliques? ha). I never remember boys being inappropriate towards me or making comments, it was the girls that were nasty about my body...

I never really dated in high school, i mean i DID date but it wasn't someone who was in high school... I dated all through high school an older guy. So i never had the experience of having a teenage boyfriend. Kind of makes me wonder about what it would have been like if I had. That's more a random thought than a contribution to the thread though i guess...

Someone mentioned women choosing to settle and marry the "safe" option who isn't compatible with them attractive-wise or sexually. Well, I almost did. But didn't. My first serious relationship was very much so that scenario, he loved me way more than i loved him and wanted to get married right away and i always was the one that said let's wait. I wasn't overly attracted to him in the end, but I could convince myself that he loves me sooooooo much and that was enough, he'd be so loyal to me and treat me right. And yet i no longer loved him or felt "turned on" by him. And i almost did marry him. But i ended up leaving him and choosing the guy that DID do it for me and i was wildly attracted to. I'm glad i made that choice, but it didn't stop things from getting all ****ed up in the end 

And while we're at it, not sure how the rest of womankind view this, I'm kind of curious... but I myself actually see more difficulties with marrying a man who did not have much sexual experience/relationship experience. And it only has a little to do with sex. I guess i would prefer someone who has dated and knows what he wants and is not a virgin/never had a serious relationship. Just my personal opinion and preference based on my own experiences.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Starstarfish said:


> The issue as has been pointed out that men don't want to marry "girls like that" but expect to transform a virginal bride into a super freak like some Fifty Shades of Grey fantasy. Just like women hope they can will themselves to be turned on by their "safe choice."
> 
> If you marry someone who wasn't interested in sex, or was obviously quite willing and able to be without it, it shouldn't be surprising if they might be "LD." If you marry someone who didn't turn you on, don't suddenly expect that will happen.
> 
> People can have any expectations (even hypocritical ones) for a partner they want, but if they are hoping marriage will suddenly turn one thing into another, they are setting themselves up for disappointment.


 Can't disagree with any of this.. *Very true*....

Not everyone who shows restraint to go all the way are low drivers though..if the affection and touchy feely is there in abundance, this is helpful.. so many facets to why we feel as we do.. and our trying to live within it... 

After marriage, I'd say more *resentment* kills a marriage bed over anything else, even among higher drivers ....have read many such stories here.. 

A giving partner with a moderate drive even... willing to learn & please.. with better conflict resolution ....this will go a long way in keeping the bed warm... 




> *Aspydad said*: Call me old fashioned, but I also preach to my two daughters that if you want to marry someone with the intent growing old with this person, that you must be very picky - someone who will not wait until marriage for intercourse = Strike ONE; someone who does not treat you with respect = Strike TWO, and someone who has no self control = Strike Three. There are other things that I have insisted on as well - like how they dress, the places that they go, and even though they are away at college, where they spend the night and what time they get home - I call it BEST PRACTICES. As long as they follow what I have preached to them - their world will be fine - if they decide to ignore me - then, that is the same as saying they are ready to be on their own and as such - all support will cease to exist.
> 
> Middle daughter did push the boundaries her first semester. Over Christmas break we had a sit down and I told her if it continues she will experience a life changing event.


I just want to say ... I do look upon this very different Aspydad, if there is one thing I have learned all my years sitting in church moving among christian friends is..* if we PREACH.... often they will rebel*.. and if we come down on them too hard, with every little thing... they will just HIDE... I feel we have 18 yrs to influence our children.. how we live before them... and of course bouncing questions/ discussion to them.. so much is picked up here too... but always with trying to understand where THEY are coming from too...listening. 

I encourage our children to debate me even! If they have a counter view to mine, and feel we are wrong... TAKE ME ON [email protected]#$ Dad gets in there too.. many enjoyable "back & forths" in our house..... so I can't say we Preach.. not at all.. we do however instill honesty in all things ...and make ourselves VERY APPROACHABLE.. our sons all know I am on this forum.. so what ! They know mom & dad can't even keep a secret from each other. it's good !... we hope they have these things in their marriages someday.. to encourage them to find someone to compliment who they are, we speak of the love languages, so many things. 

I HOPE all will wait at the very least till age 18 for intercourse.. but I would not expect them to be anything like the Duggars family (extreme!).....it still shows RESTRAINT .....we can't expect in this day & age with people marrying later & later to hold off much longer than this..when a significant person is in their lives ...

But we do encourage Love, emotional connection , to deeply care for someone they sleep with -with the intention they plan to marry this person one day or if she became pregnant, there would be NO hesitation....but JOY... If our sons deviate from this path.. it's their life ya know.. but this was what we have *tried* to instill within them... 

I think genes play some role here too, so often we are a "chip off the old block" .. it helps when parents or others in their lives (Grandparents, friends parents) are role models they have looked up to.... (and sometimes it can work the other way around even.. if we push too far, they will do everything they can to NOT be like us. )


----------



## nuclearnightmare

SA:

cant believe I'm trying (and not quite succeeding...yet) in doing what you almost (implicitly) recommend in this thread. to leave TAM, stop posting etc. I need to take a (at minimum) LONG break. I think I'm almost there. 

SA.....I have to say that a couple of your posts have been moving. ME being moved, that is. that is always unexpected for me.

In a thread you describe a genuinely loving marriage with words saying 'It has gone by fast' and decribing the closeness you have with your husband. sorry I can't locate the thread now but you might know which one I mean. 

poignant. you hit on what I believe strong marital love is. mine struggles more than yours does. but I like your description of your marriage as something to shoot for. Physical love and emotional love. solid loyalty. 
take good care SA.


----------



## nuclearnightmare

Lila said:


> I have a son and honestly, the only thing I hope and pray for is that he finds happiness in his life. If that girl happens to have a history, then I hope she'll be smart, like I was, and show him all of the wonders a sexually adventurous life has to offer.



Lila you are one of my favorite posters. Elegirl you too - I like your personal values.

i'm mainly just observing that....well what I think it is is that men don't like being compared to other men sexually. that is the 'deep-down in the psyche' thing that many (way more than would admit it) men feel. as I say its not rational, might have evolutionary roots of some kind. but it there. that doesn't mean when a man feels that he is "hating" the sexually experienced woman. 
any more than a woman will "hate" the short man. but something inside her wants height. a physical attribute, yes. but I believe studies show it is the LEADING physical attribute women look for. also a desire that is NOT rationale. just like the above for men. but it has a strong pull; also likely evolutionary IMO.


----------



## Marduk

nuclearnightmare said:


> Lila you are one of my favorite posters. Elegirl you too - I like your personal values.
> 
> i'm mainly just observing that....well what I think it is is that men don't like being compared to other men sexually. that is the 'deep-down in the psyche' thing that many (way more than would admit it) men feel. as I say its not rational, might have evolutionary roots of some kind. but it there. that doesn't mean when a man feels that he is "hating" the sexually experienced woman.
> any more than a woman will "hate" the short man. but something inside her wants height. a physical attribute, yes. but I believe studies show it is the LEADING physical attribute women look for. also a desire that is NOT rationale. just like the above for men. but it has a strong pull; also likely evolutionary IMO.


Bingo.


----------



## larry.gray

nuclearnightmare said:


> i'm mainly just observing that....well what I think it is is that men don't like being compared to other men sexually. that is the 'deep-down in the psyche' thing that many (way more than would admit it) men feel.
> 
> ....
> 
> also a desire that is NOT rationale. just like the above for men. but it has a strong pull; also likely evolutionary IMO.


What's the absolute worst thing that can happen evolutionary wise to a man? Cuckolding. 

Knowing that his woman enjoys sex with other men is a deep rooted fear that has it's root in not wanting to be a cuckold.


----------



## Starstarfish

Actually, in fairness biologically the worst thing that can happen to a species is prime specimens removing themselves from the gene pool. Which all of the "sexodous" posts are pointing to. So ...

At the point your biological imperatives are actually hurting you biologically as a species something went wrong.


----------



## Marduk

Starstarfish said:


> Actually, in fairness biologically the worst thing that can happen to a species is prime specimens removing themselves from the gene pool. Which all of the "sexodous" posts are pointing to. So ...
> 
> At the point your biological imperatives are actually hurting you biologically as a species something went wrong.


Prime specimens will never remove themselves from the gene pool.

That's what makes them prime specimens.

Don't confuse traits you approve of with reproductive success.


----------



## Aspydad

*LittleDeer* said:


> I find this post really disturbing. I guess your daughters will see controlling micro management as love. Lots of abusive men control themselves when they have to.
> 
> I have a daughter who is at university. I don't tell her who to date, how to dress, when to have sex. I am confident that she can handle those decisions herself. I'm not going to control her life until she meets a life partner.


First of all, thank God my daughters also have a mother who is very close with them. They have had detailed discussions about sex and how they should conduct themselves as I just would never feel comfortable dong this in detail. I do have a son who is younger and I will get a little more detailed with him as needed when the time is right.

I am completely aware that my daughters when away at college are going to have to make their own decisions - but, when they do, they will have to consider my rules when doing this. My oldest daughter will graduate from college in a few months - and she has turned out to be a wonderful level headed women!! She has met the love of her life and they have decided to get married. They are both going to get a masters degree next year so it will be soon after they complete this when they get married. I know that my oldest daughter is a virgin - and she has dated this guy since freshman year - she also knows that both her mother and I dated 4.5 years and waited so we are not asking for anything that we did not do ourselves. Although my oldest daughter did many bonehead things her first few years away from home (I mean half way across the country) she has learned from her mistakes and she is so much more mature now.

Younger daughter is actually learning allot from older sister as well - she does listen to her and has always looked up to her. Younger daughter has been doing even more bonehead things her first year of college and big sister has let her have it!! There are things you just do not do - like spending the night over at a house full of young men who have been drinking!! The thing is - I get that once the child is off on their own they are going to do what they decide to do - but, at least I have warned them. So far I have never had to punish either of my daughters - I came very close after the first semester with daughter number II. She is on probation with me - and since her grades are not high enough, her scholastic scholarship is at risk as well (she better not loose this because any money lost in scholarship - she will get a loan for to make up the difference.) Hopefully she wakes up as I will not support the life style she chose to live first semester. 

Some here blame parents who are too strict thus causing a child to rebel - I say B...SHT to that!! If that is true, explain to my why two children can come from the same upbringing / home and one rebels and the other does not?? Explain to me why most children who are brought up by parents who act like a friend versus a parent usually crash and burn when younger?? I will argue all day long on this one - i have seen first hand the results of this - over and over again!! If a child who comes from a solid home where rules are set for their own good rebels - I say I hate to see what would have happened to that child if he did not come form a good solid home!!

With regards to my son - I will definitely have him brainwashed by the time he goes off to college - YOU WANT TO MARRY A VIRGIN!! AND YOU NEED TO BE A VIRGIN!! (as the first time is not near as good as it is advertised to be!!) My boy loves his MOM Big Time!! He will be very aware that I married a Virgin and tell him to look at the results - I will point to our family picture when I do.

By the way - my wife knows that I was NOT a virgin - I am three years older than her (two years ahead in school as she graduated HS at age 17). I did not have the self control or the morals when needed (I was 19 yo) - I was on the rebound after loosing my first love and was actually taken advantage of by a women who was a sex nympho!! She brought the condoms and just reeled me in - what a major screw up that I have to live with the rest of my life. The worst thing about it is that it really sucked!! the foreplay was 1000% better than the intercourse with a freaking condom.

PS: I know of some abusive men - one particular was my best friend from high school who is no longer my friend - long story that I will not get into. BUT, this guy never had SELF CONTROL - gambler, drug addict, serial cheater even in college when he dated his first wife to be. NO SELF CONTROL IS THE COMMON THREAD FOR ALL ABUSERS!! Do not confuse a person who is fun to be around, smart, and happy go lucky with NO SELF CONTROL because they are two completely different traits that can coexist.


----------



## Dad&Hubby

FrenchFry said:


> It's pretty crazy. I pretty vivdly remember the first time it happened. A guy was walking towards me in the hallway and he lunged toward me and tried to grab at my chest. When I recoiled, he said:
> 
> "You hang out with Rebecca. You like it. ****."
> 
> Now I wonder where he got such vicious behavior.


I'm reading this thread and had to stop here....

I've never had to spank or "physically" punish any of my 4 children...usually the "daddy voice" startles them enough to have the desired impact...that said.

If any of my 3 sons EVER pulled a move like that....I'd whoop the living daylights out of them....That's BEYOND bad behavior...

My sons start opening doors for women by the time they are 4.

Okay...back to reading.


----------



## Dad&Hubby

always_alone said:


> I can relate to this, as I too often did things that women are not supposed to do, and got very similar reactions for it.
> 
> It is one reason why I get so cross with people for criticizing women for being out-of-control risk takers for going to a bar alone or an atm machine at night. If women are to be judged so harshly for such small things, I can only imagine what they might say about a woman walking through the dusty streets in a foreign country where she doesn't know anyone and can't speak the language.
> 
> I also find it a bit disturbing that just being a woman is considered the equivalent of walking through the worst neighborhood of Detroit waving fistfulls of dollars. I mean, seriously?


Because you're referencing my post without quoting it...let me help



Dad&Hubby said:


> I know this is going to make me look bad, but oh well. I completely agree with this!!!


SimplyAmorous's post above mine


> If my wife said to me at 1AM "Hey hon, I'm going to stop at the ATM on the way home"...I'd be like "The EFF YOU ARE!!!!"
> 
> This isn't victim blaming, it's a discussion of judgement.
> 
> Would you walk down the streets of Detroit at 2AM waving money around?
> 
> The bottom line is there are predators in this world...Just like I wouldn't go on a Safari in Africa on bicycle while wearing a meat suit....I'm not going to go to an ATM at 1am.
> 
> The cop asking "why" isn't really as bad as you think....frankly he was just stunned someone would choose to behavior in an irresponsible way. Just like if someone shot themselves because they were cleaning their gun with a round chambered and the safety intentionally turned off...the cop on that call would ask "why".


HOW in ANY SANE CONVERSATION did I link "being a woman" to walking around detroit waving a fistful of money.

What I did discuss was going to an ATM at 1am (a woman..yes) and someone getting attacked and how that was bad judgement...In fact, after me mentioning of my wife...the rest of my conversation was gender neutral (you'll recognize I shifted to using FIRST person..IE a man) because men get robbed as well at ATM's in the middle of the night....NO ONE...man or woman should be going to an ATM at 1am.

You're broadcasting 2 things....I'm alone...and I have money...and once I'm away from the ATM camera....you won't be seen.


----------



## Tubbalard

_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Dad&Hubby

Pooh Bear said:


> There's nothing wrong with caring about your safety. And yes, I would teach my daughter precautions. The problem is we blame women for rape by saying why did you do this or why did you do that. Instead of immediately condemning the rapist. And in the comparison between money in detroit and rape - someone is basically saying that my body is the equivelant of walking around with waving around a wad of money in a dangerous area. My body is not money. It is comparing my body to a piece of property. And it is always using an old argument. My body is a temptation for men. By my very nature, I am a tempation for men. What does that say to women? And then if you are raped, you blame yourself because you say to yourself, it's my fault because I could have prevented it right? If I had just not done this or that I could have stopped it. Instead we should be blaming the perpetrator from the start. The conversation needs to change. Women can take precautions but you can take all the precautions in the world and still be raped. And the blame is entirely on the rapist.


Okay...just so this is ABUNDANTLY clear.

NO WHERE did I say a woman's body is the same as money.

WOW how much further can my words get twisted from their TRUE meaning, just to supply fuel for an argument.

What you say about rapists is 100% true and accurate. I'm someone who is for chemical castration for rapists and pedophiles and automatic life imprisonment for a second offense.

But again...for the comprehension impaired....I was speaking about people putting themselves in risky situations...The ATM analogy wasn't about RAPE...it was about assault (and in the post in discussion, it only said assault and not sexual assault if I remember correctly).

Yes I do think people put themselves at risk and you have to question that decision. 

Would I let my children trick or treat alone to a know pedophile's house?
Would I let my daughter go to a Fraternity party when she's still in high school?
Would I let ANY member of my family (me included) go to an ATM at 1am?
Would I walk down the streets of Detroit waving money around at 2am?
Would my wife let me go skydiving (even though I REALLY want to)?

The answer to those are all no's....because it's risky behavior.

Now....IF my daughter snuck out one night...and went to a frat party and was raped...I wouldn't ask her why she went...I wouldn't blame her...I'd make sure she went to the police, got the medical and psychological help she needed....and then go make a peni$ necklace out of some frat boy.

Those are two VERY different issues...one is risky behavior...the other is accountability to ones actions (the rapist).

PS here is the story I was talking about...it had nothing to do with rape or a woman's "body"

"I remember a few years ago a friend was heading to her house after work at 1 AM and stopped by the ATM to withdrawal some money, she ended up being attacked and her money stolen, when she called the police and told them what had happened the first thing the (male) cop asked was "What are you doing out so late?" WTF??? WHY THE F DOES IT EVEN MATTER??? I guarantee if she were a man she wouldn't have been asked that."


----------



## Starstarfish

Aspydad said:


> *LittleDeer* said:
> 
> 
> 
> I find this post really disturbing. I guess your daughters will see controlling micro management as love. Lots of abusive men control themselves when they have to.
> 
> I have a daughter who is at university. I don't tell her who to date, how to dress, when to have sex. I am confident that she can handle those decisions herself. I'm not going to control her life until she meets a life partner.
> 
> 
> 
> First of all, thank God my daughters also have a mother who is very close with them. They have had detailed discussions about sex and how they should conduct themselves as I just would never feel comfortable dong this in detail. I do have a son who is younger and I will get a little more detailed with him as needed when the time is right.
> 
> I am completely aware that my daughters when away at college are going to have to make their own decisions - but, when they do, they will have to consider my rules when doing this. My oldest daughter will graduate from college in a few months - and she has turned out to be a wonderful level headed women!! She has met the love of her life and they have decided to get married. They are both going to get a masters degree next year so it will be soon after they complete this when they get married. I know that my oldest daughter is a virgin - and she has dated this guy since freshman year - she also knows that both her mother and I dated 4.5 years and waited so we are not asking for anything that we did not do ourselves. Although my oldest daughter did many bonehead things her first few years away from home (I mean half way across the country) she has learned from her mistakes and she is so much more mature now.
> 
> Younger daughter is actually learning allot from older sister as well - she does listen to her and has always looked up to her. Younger daughter has been doing even more bonehead things her first year of college and big sister has let her have it!! There are things you just do not do - like spending the night over at a house full of young men who have been drinking!! The thing is - I get that once the child is off on their own they are going to do what they decide to do - but, at least I have warned them. So far I have never had to punish either of my daughters - I came very close after the first semester with daughter number II. She is on probation with me - and since her grades are not high enough, her scholastic scholarship is at risk as well (she better not loose this because any money lost in scholarship - she will get a loan for to make up the difference.) Hopefully she wakes up as I will not support the life style she chose to live first semester.
> 
> Some here blame parents who are too strict thus causing a child to rebel - I say B...SHT to that!! If that is true, explain to my why two children can come from the same upbringing / home and one rebels and the other does not?? Explain to me why most children who are brought up by parents who act like a friend versus a parent usually crash and burn when younger?? I will argue all day long on this one - i have seen first hand the results of this - over and over again!! If a child who comes from a solid home where rules are set for their own good rebels - I say I hate to see what would have happened to that child if he did not come form a good solid home!!
> 
> With regards to my son - I will definitely have him brainwashed by the time he goes off to college - YOU WANT TO MARRY A VIRGIN!! AND YOU NEED TO BE A VIRGIN!! (as the first time is not near as good as it is advertised to be!!) My boy loves his MOM Big Time!! He will be very aware that I married a Virgin and tell him to look at the results - I will point to our family picture when I do.
> 
> By the way - my wife knows that I was NOT a virgin - I am three years older than her (two years ahead in school as she graduated HS at age 17). I did not have the self control or the morals when needed (I was 19 yo) - I was on the rebound after loosing my first love and was actually taken advantage of by a women who was a sex nympho!! She brought the condoms and just reeled me in - what a major screw up that I have to live with the rest of my life. The worst thing about it is that it really sucked!! the foreplay was 1000% better than the intercourse with a freaking condom.
> 
> PS: I know of some abusive men - one particular was my best friend from high school who is no longer my friend - long story that I will not get into. BUT, this guy never had SELF CONTROL - gambler, drug addict, serial cheater even in college when he dated his first wife to be. NO SELF CONTROL IS THE COMMON THREAD FOR ALL ABUSERS!! Do not confuse a person who is fun to be around, smart, and happy go lucky with NO SELF CONTROL because they are two completely different traits that can coexist.
Click to expand...

So your boys need to marry VIRGINS even though your wife accepted that you weren't (because that evil woman brought condoms and tempted you). And your marriage was a success because you married a VIRGIN. What would her have not being a virgin have changed? Did you not being a virgin make you a worthless potential choice? If not, why not?

And yoy don't expect your kids not to wait because you did with their Mom, even if you hadn't before that. 

This post kind ofsummarizes V/W, either a woman is a Virgin with worth or is useless as a potential partner, even though you weren't


----------



## Aspydad

Starstarfish said:


> So your boys need to marry VIRGINS even though your wife accepted that you weren't (because that evil woman brought condoms and tempted you). And your marriage was a success because you married a VIRGIN. What would her have not being a virgin have changed? Did you not being a virgin make you a worthless potential choice? If not, why not?
> 
> And yoy don't expect your kids not to wait because you did with their Mom, even if you hadn't before that.
> 
> This post kind ofsummarizes V/W, either a woman is a Virgin with worth or is useless as a potential partner, even though you weren't


Short answer is I want my kids to better than me as a person. I am the type person who has to be aiming at something and that's it with regards to my children.

Longer answer: I take full responsibility for the way I had conducted myself growing up all the way to today. I cannot blame my parents at all, as I know they did the best that they could given their upbringing. My Dad never talked to me about anything as he was a very quiet man. But he did show me how to be a hard worker, be honest, and above all love your wife and kids. His parents, pretty much the same. His first job was when he was 11 - he was a paper boy and had his neighborhood, then he was a cook at a local restaurant at age 15, and at age 18 he married my mom. He bought all his own clothes from the age of 15 and on - grand parents provided shelter and that was it. By age 19 I was born. I lived in an apartment until I was five and both my parents worked (blue collar)- I was a daycare kid. First house was when I was five - 950 square foot home - three bedrooms one bath - I have a younger brother who is five years younger. Cycle starts again - same neighborhood as my father grew up in - I had his first paper route at age 11 - I did this for two years until my Dad got promoted and was transferred across the country - Mom quit job at this time and became stay at home mom........ get the cycle?? I worked all the way through high school - except I worked for myself - I had 10 yards that I cut and averaged $15 an hour plus I had a contract (has a connection through one of our neighbors) to cut the grass at a local manufacturing plant - I used their tractor - My Dad made me save 50% of all the money I made from age 11 on - by the time college started I had saved $7500 - this was in 1881 - college tuition - room - board was 2500 per year at the time - I worked the first two years of college - this time for a gas station and a grocery store back home - 30 hrs a week plus I was full time student. I could go on but that was my life. I graduated with a degree in Mechanical Engineering - took me six years!!

I worked hard and liked to party hard. I bought my own vehicle, paid for my gas and insurance - I got student loans to get me the rest of the way through college. During high school - starting at age 16 - my idea of a good time was to go and buy beer and spend time with friends on the weekend and get drunk!! I used to drink and drive every weekend - we did our drinking in the car and I will tell you - I am lucky as hell I did not kill myself or anyone else!! Not sure if you get my drift here but my having intercourse one time with a girl who was the least of my worries at the time.

The night before my first date with my wife I ended up in the hospital with alcohol poisoning - I could have died - when I got home from the hospital at 10 am I was so sick - my head was pounding with a headache - could not keep even water down - but - I recovered enough by 6 pm to meet my wife to be (our first date) at the student center for a movie (Kujo the dog!!) - the freaking dog barker the entire freaking movie and we were on the front row!! So that's me. Note: I have never been drunk again since that night!! Actually stopped drinking completely once I started dating my wife as she did not drink a drop - ever.

My wife came from money - her parents where Christians and she was an only child - she could have had anything she wanted - she had the new car, she was a sorority girl, she was one of those high kickers dancers that performed at half time at the college sports events - her Dad was a retired Captain in the Navy - he had been a fighter pilot with hundreds of missions over Vietnam - at the time I met my wife he was a Vice President for a local Power Company - My wife was from a different planet than me.

I had accepted Jesus as my lord and savior about one month prior to meeting my wife - did not change me right away as you see by my drinking habit - but, that was the turning point of my life.

Now - are you trying to tell me that I cannot hold my children to a higher standard than me?? Because I was a party guy and put other people at risk - I cannot ask more of my kids?? Do you know how freaking crazy that sounds!! 

No - I will keep on with my kids just as I have. I could spoil the hell out of my kids and buy them anything they want (until five years ago I was a VP level guy for a fortune 500 company) but I do not - but, I do bring them up in such a manner so as to minimize risk and maximize their potential to become productive citizens in this country and above all Pursue Happiness!!


----------



## Aspydad

Starstarfish said:


> So your boys need to marry VIRGINS even though your wife accepted that you weren't (because that evil woman brought condoms and tempted you). And your marriage was a success because you married a VIRGIN. What would her have not being a virgin have changed? Did you not being a virgin make you a worthless potential choice? If not, why not?
> 
> And yoy don't expect your kids not to wait because you did with their Mom, even if you hadn't before that.
> 
> This post kind ofsummarizes V/W, either a woman is a Virgin with worth or is useless as a potential partner, even though you weren't


I explained more about me in the post above so you know were I am coming from.

With regards to the original intention of the OP, my thought about marrying a virgin is this:

Assuming I was back in high school / college and I know what I do today, I would not reject a girl or refuse to date a girl just because I found out she was not a virgin. But, she would have to have changed and no longer put herself open to that again - or another words - not be pursuing her next lay. The nympho that I did date back in college - I would have dumped her after date one - she definitely had some kind of issue - she was just so aggressive - almost violent - like she about sucked my tongue out of my mouth the first time we kissed - I was like wtf is that!! We could not go on a date without her just attacking me once we got back to my house (notice I say my house - she never wanted to go back to her house). The humorous thing about this is that her parents are the one's that demanded she stop seeing me because I was bringing her back to my house every date - when it was completely her idea!! I only met her parents once on a Sunday for lunch at her home - we ate spaghetti and it as messy and I never felt so uncomfortable in my entire life!!

I see allot of people on here think that it is imperative that couples try out intercourse before marriage - I think that is just a bunch of hogwash!! To me this is just justifying what they had done in the past - when in fact there is absolutely NO VALUE in trying each other out in this way whatsoever!! Hell, I dated my wife for 4.5 years prior to marriage and intercourse with her - during that 4.5 years we had great sex - she would have multiple orgasms, she could definitely get to me every time - it was just messy!! We had it down to an art. As a matter of fact - we used to have sex for about 1 to 1.5 hours at a time back then - it was awesome - we did not need to have intercourse!! When we did do it for the first time on our wedding night - what a let down!! It took a good six months to a year to figure out the intercourse thing - and I sure did have fun learning!!

So in summary - I would rather marry someone who has self control than someone who has limited self control - odds for successful marriage go up when this is the case and the odds of intercourse and mental damage due to misfire with no marriage go down - MY OPINION.


----------



## Starstarfish

So a woman would need to prove she wasn't "putting herself out there" when you had re imagined yourself a month before meeting your wife? So how long does one need to be changed to prove they are changed? 

And no offense, but hour or longer non intercourse sex sessions while sticking to a no PIV ruse sounds like technical virgin territory. Like an emotional connection is somehow made during PIV that isn't during whatever you were doing for hours for years. Which I guess is a mindset of a few posters, but honestly one that makes no sense to me.

And you can have whatever expectations for your children you want. But if I was someone's kid who found out that they expected "purity" from me while they fooled arund for going towards five years with a woman I hadn't married, and use that as a clarion call yeah, I'd question that.


----------



## EleGirl

nuclearnightmare said:


> Lila you are one of my favorite posters. Elegirl you too - I like your personal values.
> 
> i'm mainly just observing that....well what I think it is is that men don't like being compared to other men sexually. that is the 'deep-down in the psyche' thing that many (way more than would admit it) men feel. as I say its not rational, might have evolutionary roots of some kind. but it there. that doesn't mean when a man feels that he is "hating" the sexually experienced woman.


Why do men think that their wife will be putting much energy into comparing them with other men? Do men spend a lot of time and energy comparing their wife to the other women they have been with? Is this why they think that women do it?

It might just be me, but I've never done this, so I guess the idea that a woman would compare her husband to other men is just not something I get.

IMO, men have this hang-up because society teaches it and encourages it.

There are many men who are not concerned with this. It's far from universal.


----------



## ConanHub

I wouldn't respect any woman that would have sex with me.... Wait.....

Almost had a thought but it is gone now! Whew! Close call!&#55357;&#56885;&#55357;&#56885;&#55357;&#56885;
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## EleGirl

larry.gray said:


> What's the absolute worst thing that can happen evolutionary wise to a man? Cuckolding.
> 
> Knowing that his woman enjoys sex with other men is a deep rooted fear that has it's root in not wanting to be a cuckold.


Women also have fear that their husband/mate will be out cheating on them. This goes both ways.

Being concerned that one's mate is cheating is very different than a concern about someone's sexual past and labeling a woman a [email protected] if she has had sex with someone in the past.. and (gasp) enjoyed the sex.


----------



## I Don't Know

EleGirl said:


> Why do men think that their wife will be putting much energy into comparing them with other men? Do men spend a lot of time and energy comparing their wife to the other women they have been with? Is this why they think that women do it?
> 
> It might just be me, but I've never done this, so I guess the idea that a woman would compare her husband to other men is just not something I get.
> 
> IMO, men have this hang-up because society teaches it and encourages it.
> 
> There are many men who are not concerned with this. It's far from universal.


I don't know why, but I do feel like women compare. Not every day or every time they have sex. But at some point I feel like they did do a comparison of some sort.

I also don't know where this comes from, but I picture women talking with their friends and making those comparisons. That probably comes from movies or TV. 

I think in a way, men WANT to be compared. We just want to make sure we win when we are.

But sex is a very hard thing to compare. So many different factors go into whether it's good or bad. Maybe guy #1 had better technique, but guy #2 fit better physically, and guy #3 had better foreplay skills. It might be hard to actually say one was better over the other.

I know my fear is that my wife loved and wanted someone else more than she does me, but that she decided not to be with him because he drank too much, or she thought he might cheat, or he wasn't ready to commit. It'd be the same as a guy dating a woman who was a perfect 10 in every area, but she didn't want kids so he settles down with a woman who's a 7 but wants kids. Would you want to be that? Would it matter to you?


----------



## Marduk

I Don't Know said:


> I don't know why, but I do feel like women compare. Not every day or every time they have sex. But at some point I feel like they did do a comparison of some sort.
> 
> I also don't know where this comes from, but I picture women talking with their friends and making those comparisons. That probably comes from movies or TV.
> 
> I think in a way, men WANT to be compared. We just want to make sure we win when we are.
> 
> But sex is a very hard thing to compare. So many different factors go into whether it's good or bad. Maybe guy #1 had better technique, but guy #2 fit better physically, and guy #3 had better foreplay skills. It might be hard to actually say one was better over the other.
> 
> I know my fear is that my wife loved and wanted someone else more than she does me, but that she decided not to be with him because he drank too much, or she thought he might cheat, or he wasn't ready to commit. It'd be the same as a guy dating a woman who was a perfect 10 in every area, but she didn't want kids so he settles down with a woman who's a 7 but wants kids. Would you want to be that? Would it matter to you?


I've heard women do this... so it happens. Probably more than we dudes know.

I will say that it seems to have reduced as the women I know have aged...

But they still talk about past lovers when they think no one is listening, and it is very explicit.

At least that's been my experience. 

So the odds of it happening is high. Word gets around.

All you can do is try to make the ones that are talking about you talk positively, I guess.


----------



## Anonymous07

marduk said:


> I've heard women do this... so it happens. Probably more than we dudes know.
> 
> I will say that it seems to have reduced as the women I know have aged...
> 
> But they still talk about past lovers when they think no one is listening, and it is very explicit.
> 
> At least that's been my experience.


I don't do that and neither do any of my other female friends, although the media/tv would have you believe otherwise. I've never felt the need to compare my husband to another man. I don't at all think it's common.


----------



## that.girl

marduk said:


> I've heard women do this... so it happens. Probably more than we dudes know.
> 
> I will say that it seems to have reduced as the women I know have aged...
> 
> But they still talk about past lovers when they think no one is listening, and it is very explicit.
> 
> At least that's been my experience.
> 
> So the odds of it happening is high. Word gets around.
> 
> All you can do is try to make the ones that are talking about you talk positively, I guess.


Talking about past lovers is different than comparing them. Many of us have shared a really good, or really bad, story (often without naming names). But that's not the same as saying that Bob was bigger or better than James.


----------



## nuclearnightmare

EleGirl said:


> Why do men think that their wife will be putting much energy into comparing them with other men? Do men spend a lot of time and energy comparing their wife to the other women they have been with? Is this why they think that women do it?
> 
> It might just be me, but I've never done this, so I guess the idea that a woman would compare her husband to other men is just not something I get.
> 
> IMO, men have this hang-up because society teaches it and encourages it.
> 
> There are many men who are not concerned with this. It's far from universal.


Elegirl:

when I was younger I often thought I was different than many other men. in the ways I thought...my feelings etc. am now well into my fifties and now often ponder how unique I am NOT.
almost surprises me sometimes.
see my comment on men "admitting" these feelings. I think you have to add in most of those that don't admit it, most that deny it, to those that admit it. doesn't equal universal necessarily. would not be surprised if it came close though.
and of course society teaching and encouraging can be almost as powerful as the instinctual IMO


----------



## JustTired

TiggyBlue said:


> Being a early developer was enough to give me the label slapper (or sl*t) by some.


The same happened to me. When I started growing breasts, they didn't stop! By the time I was in 9th grade, I had "D" cups. The boys would stare & flirt with me hard; the girls called me a sl*t. I didn't start having sex until several years later, but I was already considered a sl*t by then.

When the class bell would ring & it was time to go to the next class, there was always a group of boys waiting for me to walk by so they can chant "Hooters! Hooters! Hooters!". Do you know how embarrassing that is?!? Then it was the girls, muttering "hoe", "sl*t" & a whole lot worse. 

Then you have my parents who were champion sl*t shamers. My father made me feel so terrible about my developing body, none of my clothes looked good on me the minute puberty hit.
My mother would stick up for me to my father but sl*t shame me in private.

My teenage years were horrendous....


----------



## Giro flee

JustTired said:


> The same happened to me. When I started growing breasts, they didn't stop! By the time I was in 9th grade, I had "D" cups. The boys would stare & flirt with me hard; the girls called me a sl*t. I didn't start having sex until several years later, but I was already considered a sl*t by then.
> 
> When the class bell would ring & it was time to go to the next class, there was always a group of boys waiting for me to walk by so they can chant "Hooters! Hooters! Hooters!". Do you know how embarrassing that is?!? Then it was the girls, muttering "hoe", "sl*t" & a whole lot worse.
> 
> Then you have my parents who were champion sl*t shamers. My father made me feel so terrible about my developing body, none of my clothes looked good on me the minute puberty hit.
> My mother would stick up for me to my father but sl*t shame me in private.
> 
> My teenage years were horrendous....



I know how you feel. Both of my parents were huge on **** shaming. I tried to hide as much as possible. Left home at seventeen and have still not fully recovered from being shamed because I have breasts. 

And to all those boys who "accidentally" bumped into me in the hallways with their hands at chest level, you are disgusting human beings.


----------



## Anonymous07

JustTired said:


> The same happened to me. When I started growing breasts, they didn't stop! By the time I was in 9th grade, I had "D" cups. The boys would stare & flirt with me hard; the girls called me a sl*t. I didn't start having sex until several years later, but I was already considered a sl*t by then.


I have a friend who had double Ds by the time she was in 7th grade and she was always harassed by the boys in class. They'd try to throw eraser pieces, paper clips, etc down her shirt, "accidentally" touch her boobs, call her names, and so on. It was horrible. She was the "slvt" and I was called a "boy" for being flat chested. I can't imagine being that developed at such a young age. Preteens and teens can be so mean, and sadly some never grow up. You would hope people mature, but I watched guys in their 20s(at least, if not older) just the other day making comments about a woman's body at work(work in retail). Sad.


----------



## Marduk

that.girl said:


> Talking about past lovers is different than comparing them. Many of us have shared a really good, or really bad, story (often without naming names). But that's not the same as saying that Bob was bigger or better than James.


Good point.

I guess sharing war stories is different than comparing.

That's what I meant.


----------



## Cletus

JustTired said:


> The same happened to me. When I started growing breasts, they didn't stop! By the time I was in 9th grade, I had "D" cups. The boys would stare & flirt with me hard; the girls called me a sl*t. I didn't start having sex until several years later, but I was already considered a sl*t by then.
> 
> When the class bell would ring & it was time to go to the next class, there was always a group of boys waiting for me to walk by so they can chant "Hooters! Hooters! Hooters!". Do you know how embarrassing that is?!? Then it was the girls, muttering "hoe", "sl*t" & a whole lot worse.
> 
> Then you have my parents who were champion sl*t shamers. My father made me feel so terrible about my developing body, none of my clothes looked good on me the minute puberty hit.
> My mother would stick up for me to my father but sl*t shame me in private.
> 
> My teenage years were horrendous....


So the guys were being idiots, but it was the girls who were the **** shamers.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Starstarfish

Bad behavior by males is just "being idiots" bad behavior by women is "Aha! Got ya!"

I'm not sure anyone debated that women don't contribute or add into the whole V/W thing. They do. But they learn that from a larger culture say as boys do - a larger culture wherein a father in this thread espouses that it was okay he wasn't a virgin when he married (because an evil woman tempted him and he just couldn't resist) but he contributes the success of his marriage to the fact his wife was a virgin. 

Therefore, placing a higher expectation on female behavior than male behavior and associated female sexuality as something inherently different. That a female is less valuable and worthy based purely on her having sex. 

And those others chime in that obviously, it's because women sit around comparing penises of past lovers. Which honestly, makes it seem like the policy is marry a virgin so she doesn't know you are small or bad in bed.


----------



## doubletrouble

Cletus said:


> I'm a Left Coaster from a progressive part of the state lampooned in Portlandia, a completely over-the-top representation of what really is a liberal bastion.


Aw c'mon, I lived in that area for four years (and still in the NW), and my W is from there -- and Portlandia nails it! Funnay stuff. 

It is a liberal bastion though, like Seattle (where I lived for three years), and they try really hard to show each other they have ditched stereotypes. Which is what makes Portlandia so damned funny.


----------



## I Don't Know

Starstarfish said:


> Bad behavior by males is just "being idiots" bad behavior by women is "Aha! Got ya!"
> 
> I'm not sure anyone debated that women don't contribute or add into the whole V/W thing. They do. But they learn that from a larger culture say as boys do - a larger culture wherein a father in this thread espouses that it was okay he wasn't a virgin when he married (because an evil woman tempted him and he just couldn't resist) but he contributes the success of his marriage to the fact his wife was a virgin.
> 
> Therefore, placing a higher expectation on female behavior than male behavior and associated female sexuality as something inherently different. That a female is less valuable and worthy based purely on her having sex.
> 
> And those others chime in that obviously, it's because women sit around comparing penises of past lovers. *Which honestly, makes it seem like the policy is marry a virgin so she doesn't know you are small or bad in bed.*


Oh, she'd still know.


----------



## JustTired

Giro flee said:


> I know how you feel. Both of my parents were huge on **** shaming. I tried to hide as much as possible. Left home at seventeen and have still not fully recovered from being shamed because I have breasts.
> 
> And to all those boys who "accidentally" bumped into me in the hallways with their hands at chest level, you are disgusting human beings.


OMG yes!!!! The boys always had to reach for things in front of me, always making sure they copped a feel. I don't even want to talk about the time I was cornered in the hallway by 2 boys & they groped my breasts. I never reported it because, what's the point? My sl*t shaming parents would tell me that I brought it on myself & my school administrators were not any better.

Oh yeah, by senior year....I was a DDD cup. When I turned 18, I got a breast reduction. I look back now & realize I got the breast reduction as a way to punish my breasts for giving me such a hard time.

I had some very painful teenage years...sigh....I vow to never make that mistake with my daughter. I will never make her feel bad about her body & will never **** shame her ever.


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

Starstarfish said:


> I'm not sure anyone debated that women don't contribute or add into the whole V/W thing. They do. But they learn that from a larger culture say as boys do - ...


So, women participate, but it's still men's fault? I don't know about that.



> ... a larger culture wherein a father in this thread espouses that it was okay he wasn't a virgin when he married (because an evil woman tempted him and he just couldn't resist) but he contributes the success of his marriage to the fact his wife was a virgin.


That poster admitted his moral failing in having premarital sex. It's dishonest for you to try to force fit him into your narrative of men bragging and being applauded for sexual conquests. And it's perfectly natural for him to advise his children to avoid his moral failings. If each generation felt entitled to be no more moral than the prior generation, we would have a rapid degeneration of society.



> Therefore, placing a higher expectation on female behavior than male behavior and associated female sexuality as something inherently different. That a female is less valuable and worthy based purely on her having sex.


How does men valuing chastity in women more highly than women value it in men equate to men having more value than women? Could we apply that same logic to women's preferences? Does the fact that women value wealth in men more than men value it in women mean that men have less value than women? Do these alleged differences in value cancel out? Or is it only men's sexual preferences that are at fault?



> And those others chime in that obviously, it's because women sit around comparing penises of past lovers. Which honestly, makes it seem like the policy is marry a virgin so she doesn't know you are small or bad in bed.


I imagine it would be impossible for women not to compare lovers. As long as her experience isn't too extensive, she will remember most of it.

But I imagine the primary reasons that men value chastity is that paternity becomes more assured and the risk of divorce is lessened. The risk of divorce is positively correlated with the number of women's premarital sexual partners. I won't venture a guess as to why.


----------



## Married but Happy

BronzeTorpedo said:


> The risk of divorce is positively correlated with the number of women's premarital sexual partners.


Do you have a reference for that?

I can see that the number of POST-marital sexual partners is positively correlated with the risk of divorce. That correlation isn't subtle at all.


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

Married but Happy said:


> Do you have a reference for that?
> 
> I can see that the number of POST-marital sexual partners is positively correlated with the risk of divorce. That correlation isn't subtle at all.


It's not free, but you can see the abstract here.
Premarital Sex, Premarital Cohabitation, and the Risk of Subsequent Marital Dissolution Among Women - Teachman - 2004 - Journal of Marriage and Family - Wiley Online Library

The blogger below summarizes the paper and charts it alongside another Heritage study.
The Social Pathologist: Sexual Partner Divorce Risk


----------



## norajane

> I imagine it would be impossible for women not to compare lovers. As long as her experience isn't too extensive, she will remember most of it.


This really isn't true, certainly not for everyone! I barely remember the guys I've had sex with, much less the sex. And my experience was not extensive for sure.


----------



## Starstarfish

So do men vivid remember most sex they have had if their experience isn't too extensive? (Is that number if times you've had sex or based purely on number of partners? What counts as sex?)

Sometimes you have an experience si bad you pray you can forget about it.


----------



## ConanHub

Starstarfish said:


> So do men vivid remember most sex they have had if their experience isn't too extensive? (Is that number if times you've had sex or based purely on number of partners? What counts as sex?)
> 
> Sometimes you have an experience si bad you pray you can forget about it.


I had a lot of experiences and actually forgot many but I also remembered quite a few. I remember many sex experiences and sometimes just certain moments during sex.

I think if your number is high, it gets harder to remember everything. I agree with the bad experiences. Hard to forget, equally hard to forget are the mind-blowing ones.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## JustTired

norajane said:


> This really isn't true, certainly not for everyone! I barely remember the guys I've had sex with, much less the sex. And my experience was not extensive for sure.


Same here, I don't compare prior lovers to each other. I have plenty of other more improtant things to keep in my memory bank. ;-)


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

JustTired said:


> Same here, I don't compare prior lovers to each other. I have plenty of other more improtant things to keep in my memory bank. ;-)


Again, I think you're one of the unusual ones. Most women can probably recall some details about their past sexual partners and experiences.


----------



## richardsharpe

Good evening all
I don't know why people are worried about comparisons with other lovers. If you are worried that you aren't the best he / she ever had, then keep learning what your partner likes until you ARE the best. 

Being a great lover is not based on some physical attribute, but on what you do and say.


----------



## that.girl

BronzeTorpedo said:


> Again, I think you're one of the unusual ones. Most women can probably recall some details about their past sexual partners and experiences.


I can remember them if i try. But it's not something i dwell on in general. I don't sit around thinking about how a guy measures up against others, but if i was asked to compare them i probably could.


----------



## Cletus

Starstarfish said:


> So a woman would need to prove she wasn't "putting herself out there" when you had re imagined yourself a month before meeting your wife? So how long does one need to be changed to prove they are changed?
> 
> And no offense, but hour or longer non intercourse sex sessions while sticking to a no PIV ruse sounds like technical virgin territory. Like an emotional connection is somehow made during PIV that isn't during whatever you were doing for hours for years. Which I guess is a mindset of a few posters, but honestly one that makes no sense to me.
> 
> And you can have whatever expectations for your children you want. But if I was someone's kid who found out that they expected "purity" from me while they fooled arund for going towards five years with a woman I hadn't married, and use that as a clarion call yeah, I'd question that.




Staring and flirting isn't slvt shaming. In fact, it's pretty mainstream sexual behavior, so you can stuff the insinuation of a double standard in a sock.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## nuclearnightmare

that.girl said:


> I can remember them if i try. But it's not something i dwell on in general. I don't sit around thinking about how a guy measures up against others, but if i was asked to compare them i probably could.


do you remember any of them as being a lot more sexually exciting for you than the others? i.e. the lust factor being higher for some than for others.


----------



## staarz21

I just tried to sit here and remember my past sexual encounters while reading this thread. I've been with my H for 6.5 years now. Wouldn't you know it, that I can sort of remember what my partners faces looked like - but I can't recall penis size, positions, duration, etc. 

I literally never think about it and because I don't think about it, I've all but forgotten it. I've never once sat down with my girlfriends and talked about any of my sexual encounters either. We usually talk about new things we can do, techniques we can try, or lingerie we can buy. We don't give past partners any thought. 

My H on the other hand has talked about his spank bank (as have other men on this forum) that includes past sexual experiences with exes. I am assuming this is where this insecurity stems from with men. Maybe some men think we fantasize about our past sex partners as much as they do and they don't like it? Just guessing.


----------



## that.girl

nuclearnightmare said:


> do you remember any of them as being a lot more sexually exciting for you than the others? i.e. the lust factor being higher for some than for others.


Only if they are on the extreme end of the spectrum. So really only one, who was particularly horrible. 

I honestly couldn't compare size. They all seemed average to me.


----------



## doubletrouble

JustTired said:


> Oh yeah, by senior year....I was a DDD cup. When I turned 18, I got a breast reduction. I look back now & realize I got the breast reduction as a way to punish my breasts for giving me such a hard time.


Our daughter is an F or G -- I don't keep track of the letters but I believe your back is thanking you today for doing that then, regardless of your reasons. D wants hers reduced as well.


----------



## doubletrouble

that.girl said:


> Only if they are on the extreme end of the spectrum. So really only one, who was particularly horrible.
> 
> I honestly couldn't compare size. They all seemed average to me.


During our post-D-Day breakdown, W had to tell me about her first H being larger than me, about OM's d!ck being "unique", the specific color of his eyes, things he did etc, and other specifics about past lovers. And she has, in other conversations, stated she has a steel trap memory for things important to her. She quoted a conversation we had two years ago, word for word (as far as I could remember it). So I believe you can, if you consider it important, one way or another. 

I've had three times the lovers W has had, and can't remember many specific events, and since I'm in my 50s now it's not easy to remember details of 35 years ago, but there are plenty of mind movies I could've drug up to share with her. Didn't, though; I don't fight that way.


----------



## Starstarfish

She could remember that amount of detail - that doesn't mean all people (male or female) can, do, or want to. 

Or PS he's a hint - maybe she was just making $h!t up to mess with you.


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

Starstarfish said:


> She could remember that amount of detail - that doesn't mean all people (male or female) can, do, or want to.
> 
> Or PS he's a hint - maybe she was just making $h!t up to mess with you.


Did anyone claim that ALL people can, or want to, or will, remember exacting detail of their sexual experiences? I must have missed that.


----------



## Starstarfish

> Staring and flirting isn't slvt shaming. In fact, it's pretty mainstream sexual behavior, so you can stuff the insinuation of a double standard in a sock.


Hmm. Nope. 

If some of this behavior described by other female posters happened in "the real world" as an adult to another adult, it wouldn't be "mainstream sexual behavior" - it would be sexual harassment. So go stuff the "boys will be boys" attitude in that sock. 

Staring and flirting doesn't equal with:

- You have large breasts thus you are a s!ut
- Because you are a s!ut, I can treat you how I please
- A s!ut once deemed one has no right to decisions about her own body - because you know "she likes it."
- You can determine who is a s!ut based on the reputation of her friends
- S!ut is not just a harmless title you place on someone, it's a title that comes with a mindset about how you should treat them.


----------



## norajane

BronzeTorpedo said:


> Did anyone claim that ALL people can, or want to, or will, remember exacting detail of their sexual experiences? I must have missed that.


Well, you said something along those lines, that it would be impossible for women not to compare lovers?



BronzeTorpedo said:


> I imagine it would be impossible for women not to compare lovers. As long as her experience isn't too extensive, she will remember most of it.


----------



## Starstarfish

BronzeTorpedo said:


> Did anyone claim that ALL people can, or want to, or will, remember exacting detail of their sexual experiences? I must have missed that.


Sorry, but when you start referring to men or women as a collective group, but not preference statements with "some" or another diminutive, you are by default implying it's something the entire group (and thus ALL) does. 

If you don't want people to assume that's what you mean, change your phrasing. 

And the implication here is that obviously women must be remembering the details, because they just can't stop sharing them with their friends. 



> I don't know why, but I do feel like women compare. Not every day or every time they have sex. But at some point I feel like they did do a comparison of some sort.


This one just "knows" that women (as a collective) remember enough to compare. Not some women or specific women, but women as a collective group. 



> I've heard women do this... so it happens. Probably more than we dudes know.


This one knows it happens too. Because it heard it somewhere from someone. Therefore it must be true. Now he goes on to say he's had personal experience, thus obviously all women just must be doing this, or the change of them doing it is high.


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

norajane said:


> Well, you said something along those lines, that it would be impossible for women not to compare lovers?


The key here is that I didn't use the word ALL. If I had meant ALL women compare lovers, I would have used that word. The word was conspicuously absent from my statement.


----------



## GTdad

For my part, give me a woman with just a touch of both.

Oh wait. I married her 31 years ago.


----------



## norajane

BronzeTorpedo said:


> The key here is that I didn't use the word ALL. If I had meant ALL women compare lovers, I would have used that word. The word was conspicuously absent from my statement.


I believe if you had meant some or few or many or most or "the women I know," you would have said that instead of the blanket "women."

Apparently, I'm not the only one who read it that way.

But, ok. You didn't mean all.


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

Starstarfish said:


> Sorry, but when you start referring to men or women as a collective group, but not preference statements with "some" or another diminutive, you are by default implying it's something the entire group (and thus ALL) does.
> 
> If you don't want people to assume that's what you mean, change your phrasing.


I am employing a common literary technique known as a generalization. And it's obvious that I am.

What would be more appropriate, so preface every single statement about women, or men, or any group with a disclaimer that one isn't referring to every single member of said group, and that exceptions obviously exist, or to use the words "all" or "every" when that is what you mean? Obviously, it's the latter.

If I say that women have more verbal accumen than men, it's obvious that there are some exceptions. Only a fool or a pedant would agree that the generalization wasn't clear.

If generalizations were disallowed, most of the conversations here would be impossible. Even the topic of this thread, the madonna/wh0re dichotomy and how society and, specifically, the men in society encourage and perpetuate it, would be meaningless. Did the OP mean ALL men engage in the madonna/wh0re attitude? If ALL men don't, which is obviously true, then the topic becomes meaningless.

So, for the record, in the future, if I intend to argue that every single member of a group or class has a specific trait, or attitude, or behavior, then I will use those words explicitly. If those words are missing, I will obviously be making a generalization that will necessarily have exceptions. If I state that men like cars more than women, I will obviously not mean that every single man on Earth enjoys cars more than each and every woman, with no exceptions. I will simply mean that the average man cares more about cars than the average woman, with some exceptions and overlap. Okay?


----------



## norajane

Sometimes generalizations serve the purpose of using shorthand. Often, though, generalizations are actually wrong and yet people persist in using them as though they are true, or true for everyone. Just like stereotypes.

On a forum like this where we tend to speak from our own experiences, we also tend to speak up when we see generalizations that are wrong in our experience.

In my experience, the generalization you made that women would find it impossible not to compare lovers is just patently wrong, for me and for people that I associate with. We may be more of a majority than your generalization allows.


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

norajane said:


> Sometimes generalizations serve the purpose of using shorthand. Often, though, generalizations are actually wrong and yet people persist in using them as though they are true, or true for everyone. Just like stereotypes.
> 
> On a forum like this where we tend to speak from our own experiences, we also tend to speak up when we see generalizations that are wrong in our experience.
> 
> In my experience, the generalization you made that women would find it impossible not to compare lovers is just patently wrong, for me and for people that I associate with. We may be more of a majority than your generalization allows.


I wasn't arguing that women make charts, keep spreadsheets, and sit around discussing men's size, stamina, and technique ala Sex and the City. My generalization was based on nothing more than the assumption that most (NOT ALL) women can remember events that happened in the past. That's how comparisons happen. I know I like chocolate ice cream best because I've tried several other flavors, and I REMEMBER trying them. Therefore, I can compare the flavors and remember that chocolate is my favorite. It would be very inconvenient if, ever time I went to the ice cream parlor, I had no memory of what ice cream tasted like. If I randomly chose flavors, I probably wouldn't like ice cream as much as I do when I regularly order chocolate.

If you, and the people that you associate with, cannot remember past events, then obviously it wouldn't apply to you. But I anticipate similar problems in your sex lives. How do you know what positions and techniques you enjoy? If each sexual experience is like your first time, because you've forgotten all the others, the constant process of discovery may be enjoyable for a bit, but it's also nice to hone your skills and preferences with experience that you can remember.


----------



## norajane

Why are you trying to invalidate what my experience feels like to me by mischaracterizing it into an extreme where I don't remember past events to the point I don't know what I enjoy during sex? Is that so you can keep believing in your generalization? 

I think so infrequently about past lovers that comparing them doesn't ever enter my mind, which is far outside your generalization of finding it _impossible _not to compare them.

Your generalization does little to actually inform men who fear that their wives or girlfriends are comparing them to past lovers. Your generalization says women must be doing it, it would be impossible not to. I'm saying I don't do it, and I am not alone in that, and there may be a lot more women like me than you think.


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

norajane said:


> Why are you trying to invalidate what my experience feels like to me by mischaracterizing it into an extreme where I don't remember past events to the point I don't know what I enjoy during sex? Is that so you can keep believing in your generalization?


I was simply explaining my generalization. Preferences are necessarily based on comparison. Someone who never makes comparisons has no basis for forming opinions and preferences. If that fact invalidates your experience, what can I say?



> I think so infrequently about past lovers that comparing them doesn't ever enter my mind, which is far outside your generalization of finding it _impossible _not to compare them.


Not at all. It's entirely consistent to believe that a woman can refrain from sitting around gossiping with her girlfriends about her husband's sexual prowess while still retaining some memory of her prior lovers. If she thinks her husband is her best sex ever, which isn't that unusual to hear, well she must be making a comparison to her prior lovers, n'est ce pas?

Now, again, to be specific, I will stipulate that not ALL women make these comparisons implicit in remembering past experiences. Some women may completely forget all details of their sexual past. But I would suspect that most women remember and are capable of making these comparisons to form opinions and preferences.

So, if you are stating that you don't gossip with your girlfriends like Sex and the City, I believe you. I would hope that most wives don't. But if you're arguing that you've completely forgotten your sexual past, I'm much more skeptical.


----------



## EleGirl

Past relationships are in the past because they failed. Why would someone spend any time at all thinking about sex in past relationships, reliving something that fail and might have very bad feelings associated with it?

Do the men who are concerned about being compared to other men, spend time comparing their wife to other women they have been with? If not.. why would they think that women in general do this?


----------



## ConanHub

EleGirl said:


> Past relationships are in the past because they failed. Why would someone spend any time at all thinking about sex in past relationships, reliving something that fail and might have very bad feelings associated with it?
> 
> Do the men who are concerned about being compared to other men, spend time comparing their wife to other women they have been with? If not.. why would they think that women in general do this?


Probably common in certain groups. Some men groups and women groups obviously talk and compare. I remember quite a lot and so does both a man and woman I know.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## I Don't Know

EleGirl said:


> Past relationships are in the past because they failed. Why would someone spend any time at all thinking about sex in past relationships, reliving something that fail and might have very bad feelings associated with it?
> 
> Do the men who are concerned about being compared to other men, spend time comparing their wife to other women they have been with? If not.. why would they think that women in general do this?


Just because something is in the past doesn't mean it wasn't "better". I had a great time working at a home improvement store. The pay wasn't great and I moved on to other things. Now I make more money but don't enjoy the work nearly as much. I sacrificed fun for money.

That's what I'm saying with past relationships. Just because my wife didn't marry "Doug" doesn't mean she didn't think he was better in bed or she didn't love him more. He was an alcoholic. Maybe she chose stability over smoking hot sex. Of course I'm crazy so maybe she chose crazy guy and hot sex over drunk guy and "meh" sex. I'll never know.

I don't compare my wife to others in a one is better than another kind of way, but there are differences and I am aware of them. It's not a stretch to think that some (better?) women at least have a very basic comparison in the back of their minds.


----------



## always_alone

I Don't Know said:


> I don't compare my wife to others in a one is better than another kind of way, but there are differences and I am aware of them. It's not a stretch to think that some (better?) women at least have a very basic comparison in the back of their minds.


IOW, Elegirl, the answer to your question is yes. The men who are perturbed about their wives comparing them to past lovers are the ones comparing their wives.


----------



## *LittleDeer*

I know some men and women who think about past lovers sometimes. And I know some that think about having sex with others and watch porn etc. 

I would find it to be a very disturbing set of double standards if my partner was jealous of a past lover but watched porn or fantasised about other women. 

Personally I would be more inclined to fantasise about a man I have never been with. Then there would be no bad times just awesome sex that I created perfectly in mind. He'd have a fantastic penis amongst other things. 

Sorry getting distracted.


----------



## EleGirl

*LittleDeer* said:


> I know some men and women who think about past lovers sometimes. And I know some that think about having sex with others and watch porn etc.
> 
> I would find it to be a very disturbing set of double standards if my partner was jealous of a past lover but watched porn or fantasised about other women.
> 
> Personally I would be more inclined to fantasise about a man I have never been with. Then there would be no bad times just awesome sex that I created perfectly in mind. He'd have a fantastic penis amongst other things.
> 
> Sorry getting distracted.


This is a good point. Men watch porn. If we believe what is said on TAM and in very other media outlet, about 99% of men watch it pretty regularly.

The men are obviously fanaticizing about other women.. a lot of other women. Surely they are comparing their wife/SO to the porn stars that they like so much.

Like you, I'd fantasize about some imaginary guy that I don't know longer before I'd even think about sex with some guy who I broke up with because it was a bad relationship.


----------



## ConanHub

*LittleDeer* said:


> I know some men and women who think about past lovers sometimes. And I know some that think about having sex with others and watch porn etc.
> 
> I would find it to be a very disturbing set of double standards if my partner was jealous of a past lover but watched porn or fantasised about other women.
> 
> Personally I would be more inclined to fantasise about a man I have never been with. Then there would be no bad times just awesome sex that I created perfectly in mind. He'd have a fantastic penis amongst other things.
> 
> Sorry getting distracted.


Gasp!!! Fantastic penis??!!?? You are such a naughty girl!!!

Keep up the good work! &#55357;&#56841;&#55357;&#56833;&#55357;&#56833;&#55357;&#56833;
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## ConanHub

I know some men and women romanticize their past lovers, forgetting the bad parts and fantasizing about the rest.

Still not reality but with a real past lover as the foundation for the fantasy. I have been guilty of this particular fantasy as well.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## EleGirl

I Don't Know said:


> Just because something is in the past doesn't mean it wasn't "better". I had a great time working at a home improvement store. The pay wasn't great and I moved on to other things. Now I make more money but don't enjoy the work nearly as much. I sacrificed fun for money.
> 
> That's what I'm saying with past relationships. Just because my wife didn't marry "Doug" doesn't mean she didn't think he was better in bed or she didn't love him more. He was an alcoholic. Maybe she chose stability over smoking hot sex. Of course I'm crazy so maybe she chose crazy guy and hot sex over drunk guy and "meh" sex. I'll never know.
> 
> I don't compare my wife to others in a one is better than another kind of way, but there are differences and I am aware of them. It's not a stretch to think that some (better?) women at least have a very basic comparison in the back of their minds.


The very thought of sex with "Doug" is more than likely not a pleasant thought. He might have been smoking hot in bed.. but a relationship with an alcoholic, drug user, abuser, etc is not pleasant thing to revisit. Plus, things like alcoholism, drugs, etc most often damage the sex life. She left him for a reason.

If he dumped her, then there is hurt associated with that relationship. So I don't think that most would spend time thinking in a positive way about sex with an ex.

So yes, there are probably some men and some women who do sitting around comparing their spouse to some other person in their past. But I don't think that most do this. I also think that those who worry about it, worry because they do this. They compare their spouse to others in their past. So they think that their spouse is doing the same thing that they are.


----------



## EleGirl

GTdad said:


> For my part, give me a woman with just a touch of both.
> 
> Oh wait. I married her 31 years ago.


Here is the question.. "[email protected] is a derogatory term." Why use it at all when taking about a wife. Why not just say that you wanted, and have, a sexual goddess. Or something that is not so negative?


----------



## Marduk

always_alone said:


> IOW, Elegirl, the answer to your question is yes. The men who are perturbed about their wives comparing them to past lovers are the ones comparing their wives.


Thats baloney.

My wife talks about ex's all the time, often in graphic detail and at completely inappropriate times.

I don't think about the women in my past usually at all.

My wife's friend refuses to let any of her ex's out of her life. She has to be close friends with all of them. Hell, she used to have at least a half dozen of them over when her kids would have a birthday.

Until her husband flipped out and had enough of it -- and he has only ever told me about one of his ex's, and only when I asked.

Pure projection.


----------



## Marduk

EleGirl said:


> Here is the question.. "[email protected] is a derogatory term." Why use it at all when taking about a wife. Why not just say that you wanted, and have, a sexual goddess. Or something that is not so negative?


Why is it derogatory?

I mean, I can see if it's said out of anger.


----------



## always_alone

marduk said:


> Why is it derogatory?


Good point. Lots of men absolutely love wh0res, frequent them all the time, pay large amounts of money for their services.

And always, always treat them and speak of them with the utmost of respect.


----------



## always_alone

marduk said:


> Thats baloney.
> 
> My wife talks about ex's all the time, often in graphic detail and at completely inappropriate times.


Really? Does she compare them to you? And if so, why do you put up with it?


----------



## staarz21

marduk said:


> Why is it derogatory?
> 
> I mean, I can see if it's said out of anger.


You don't see how it's a derogatory term? Maybe this is where mixed signals are occurring. I have never heard the term where it would mean anything positive at all. It's always been negative.

The dictionary describes the word as a man or woman who engages in sexual activity for money. Also a promiscuous or immoral woman.

Ok. I will really try to find the positive here. But it's not likely to happen. 

There are other words you can use to describe that aren't so negative.


----------



## NobodySpecial

staarz21 said:


> You don't see how it's a derogatory term?


My husband does not use it as a derogatory term. He uses it to refer to my naughty side that he loves. We can choose to put meaning on words or choose to hear the meaning intended by the speaker.


----------



## Starstarfish

marduk said:


> Thats baloney.
> 
> My wife talks about ex's all the time, often in graphic detail and at completely inappropriate times.
> 
> I don't think about the women in my past usually at all.
> 
> My wife's friend refuses to let any of her ex's out of her life. She has to be close friends with all of them. Hell, she used to have at least a half dozen of them over when her kids would have a birthday.
> 
> Until her husband flipped out and had enough of it -- and he has only ever told me about one of his ex's, and only when I asked.
> 
> Pure projection.


Uh, this sounds like projection too. You married a woman with no offense, but no sense of embarrassment or decorum to talk about sex with exes in front of her husband, and has friends who do the same. Has she always done this?

I'm not sure comparing all of us to the lowest common denominator is really fair.


----------



## ntamph

The double standard is alive and well. I'm a guy and I've had to try really hard to overcome virgin/***** thinking in my own life. It's one of the most obvious examples of male privilege.

If a woman can just be honest about what she wants from me and we have good communication about our sexual relationship than I have absolutely no right to inquire about her past beyond STDs. Hopefully, if you have good communication and have chosen each other because you want a healthy sexual relationship than going into past experiences will only trigger RJ. She's the woman she is today because of the sum total of her experiences.


----------



## EleGirl

NobodySpecial said:


> My husband does not use it as a derogatory term. He uses it to refer to my naughty side that he loves. We can choose to put meaning on words or choose to hear the meaning intended by the speaker.


Women who have a naughty side and love sex are not [email protected] They are normal, healthy women.

If you are ok with your husband basically calling you a prostitute and low life, then that's fine for you. It's not fine for many women. 

I have a great naughty side, love sex, am high drive.. but i'm not a [email protected]

So if you like being called that, it's ok FOR YOU. Do not assume for a minute that it's ok with all or most women.


----------



## ConanHub

Referring to your wife in a derogatory term might be the only way to unlock her sexuality unfortunately.

Many women have put their natural and healthy sexual desire and appetite in the "dirty" category. They have a mental block until they embrace a derogatory term for themselves in bed.

It is actually quite extraordinary how social stigmas and bad education can impact something as natural as eating.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## *LittleDeer*

ConanHub said:


> Referring to your wife in a derogatory term might be the only way to unlock her sexuality unfortunately.
> 
> Many women have put their natural and healthy sexual desire and appetite in the "dirty" category. They have a mental block until they embrace a derogatory term for themselves in bed.
> 
> It is actually quite extraordinary how social stigmas and bad education can impact something as natural as eating.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I agree that some women are definitely like this, And that's part of the virgin ***** dichotomy that hurts women.


----------



## ConanHub

*LittleDeer* said:


> I agree that some women are definitely like this, And that's part of the virgin ***** dichotomy that hurts women.


Hurts us husbands as well. Mrs. Conan has been horribly impacted by this and earlier in life, used by very unscrupulous men maneuvering her using M/H.

It has taken me years to help her undo damage to her sexual identity and appetite. We are getting there but I have had to use the term "My ****" to help her open up and be more free in the bedroom.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Cletus

I just spent several days with my brother, who reminded me (or told me for the first time) of a story I didn't recall.

I was making nighttime visits to my girlfriend's house in high school - riding 10 miles one way on a bike and coming home before dawn. My brother, with whom I shared a bedroom, knew this of course. He nicknamed me "Bicycle Cletus" and started spreading the new name around our high school as a means of embarrassing his older brother. It was slvt shaming, but not exactly of the variety we're talking about here.

When my girlfriend got wind of it, she confronted him right in the school hallway and slapped him across the face for ruining my "reputation".


----------



## jld

How did he react?


----------



## Cletus

jld said:


> How did he react?


I will have to ask.


----------



## jld

You did not see it or hear about it? 

So I am guessing he did not hit her back in self-defense.


----------



## Marduk

always_alone said:


> Really? Does she compare them to you? And if so, why do you put up with it?


That's a whole other topic...

But, ya, it's a problem.


----------



## Marduk

always_alone said:


> Good point. Lots of men absolutely love wh0res, frequent them all the time, pay large amounts of money for their services.
> 
> And always, always treat them and speak of them with the utmost of respect.


Ah, I was referring to the bedroom talk, but I see your point.


----------



## Marduk

Starstarfish said:


> Uh, this sounds like projection too. You married a woman with no offense, but no sense of embarrassment or decorum to talk about sex with exes in front of her husband, and has friends who do the same. Has she always done this?
> 
> I'm not sure comparing all of us to the lowest common denominator is really fair.


Fair enough, we all respond from experience.

It doesn't change my point, tho. 

Men who don't like to hear about their wives past lovers aren't necessarily the ones that compare their wives to their past lovers.

Heck, there's a giant thread right now about a virgin guy finding out his wife was anything but that...

He literally has nothing to compare her to, yet he's sure worried about her comparing him to other guys... 

That was my point.


----------



## always_alone

marduk said:


> That's a whole other topic...
> 
> But, ya, it's a problem.


. Sorry to hear that!

And point taken.


----------



## ConanHub

marduk said:


> That's a whole other topic...
> 
> But, ya, it's a problem.


Very interested in this dynamic. Would you open a thread on this topic?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Marduk

ConanHub said:


> Very interested in this dynamic. Would you open a thread on this topic?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I did somewhere... I'll try to find it.


----------



## samyeagar

always_alone said:


> Really? Does she compare them to you? And if so, why do you put up with it?





marduk said:


> That's a whole other topic...
> 
> But, ya, it's a problem.





always_alone said:


> . Sorry to hear that!
> 
> And point taken.


His isn't the only wife that does that.


----------



## Dad&Hubby

Starstarfish said:


> I'm not sure comparing all of us to the lowest common denominator is really fair.


I had to chime in on this one.

If we used this as a rule....95% of the discord I see between many of the male and female posters on this site would disappear.

Sorry but I've seen many male posters use the "most women (or worse...leaving out the most part) are...insert negative comment"..and I see many female posters do the exact same thing but with change "women" to "men".


----------



## GTdad

EleGirl said:


> Here is the question.. "[email protected] is a derogatory term." Why use it at all when taking about a wife. Why not just say that you wanted, and have, a sexual goddess. Or something that is not so negative?


Teach me to try to find common ground.

I've never called my wife a wh*re, even during the most heated and intimate moments. My point was that my wife has her wanton side, which I dearly love. I didn't mean anything derogatory by it, and I'm sorry that it was taken that way.


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

It's not the words "wh0re" or "slvt" that women inherently object to. Those are just words. It's the concept behind those words that women find objectionable. And the argument that the concept is prostitution is laughable. The concept is promiscuous women. If women were to have a conference and introduce a new, unobjectionable word to communicate the concept of a promiscuous women, that word would immediately become objectionable because women don't like being identified as promiscuous.

And the issue of promiscuity is entirely different from the issue of libido, or enjoyment. There are promiscuous women who hate sex. There are virgins with high libido. So don't argue the straw man that women with many partners are just normal with healthy sex drives. You can be all of that with few partners.


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

There's another common scenario that many of the women on this thread seem to be entirely ignorant of. That scenario is where the marriage hits a rough patch and a spouse starts Facebooking exes. Frequently, the messaging leads to an affair.

Now, if past relationships were almost always painful to remember, and almost nobody wanted to stroll down memory lane, why would Facebook be viewed so negatively by marriage counselors and others wanting to lower infidelity?


----------



## Starstarfish

BronzeTorpedo said:


> It's not the words "wh0re" or "slvt" that women inherently object to. Those are just words. It's the concept behind those words that women find objectionable. And the argument that the concept is prostitution is laughable. The concept is promiscuous women. If women were to have a conference and introduce a new, unobjectionable word to communicate the concept of a promiscuous women, that word would immediately become objectionable because women don't like being identified as promiscuous.
> 
> And the issue of promiscuity is entirely different from the issue of libido, or enjoyment. There are promiscuous women who hate sex. There are virgins with high libido. So don't argue the straw man that women with many partners are just normal with healthy sex drives. You can be all of that with few partners.


And so could men. 

Not a straw man. Do you personally refer to men who have had multiple partners as promiscuous? If not, why not?


----------



## Starstarfish

BronzeTorpedo said:


> There's another common scenario that many of the women on this thread seem to be entirely ignorant of. That scenario is where the marriage hits a rough patch and a spouse starts Facebooking exes. Frequently, the messaging leads to an affair.
> 
> Now, if past relationships were almost always painful to remember, and almost nobody wanted to stroll down memory lane, why would Facebook be viewed so negatively by marriage counselors and others wanting to lower infidelity?


What is the obsession with whether or not people remember past relationships? 

Do you remember your past relationships and go catfishing on Facebook?


----------



## samyeagar

Starstarfish said:


> And so could men.
> 
> Not a straw man. Do you personally refer to men who have had multiple partners as promiscuous? If not, why not?


The term "player" comes to mind, and it's not usually used in a good light...


----------



## Married but Happy

There should be a word that combines the concepts of selectivity and promiscuity - along the lines of thoughtful romantic and sexual diversity. I've had plenty of sexual partners, but I've been selective about who I have sex with. I'm definitely not a player. The language is lacking in *non-judgmental *words to describe behaviors that fall between prudish and promiscuous. And so, there is polarization in thinking and discussion.


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

Starstarfish said:


> Do you personally refer to men who have had multiple partners as promiscuous? If not, why not?


Sure. Many sexual partners is the definition of promiscuous. So it would apply equally to men and women. The reason promiscuity isn't as negative in men as it is in women is because of sexual preferences. Men place more value on chastity in women than women place on chastity in men. Isn't it interesting that it's men's preferences that we insist on portraying as incorrect?


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

Starstarfish said:


> What is the obsession with whether or not people remember past relationships?


Good question. It seems quite silly to take the position that past relationships are lost to the ether once they end. Why can't people admit that they remember the people they had sex with in the past?



> Do you remember your past relationships and go catfishing on Facebook?


Of course I remember past relationships. I am Facebook friends with a couple of exes for the purposes of class reunion communications. I haven't communicated with my exes outside of that purpose. I did have to reduce my level of following one of my exes because she is a Facebook spammer and I really don't need to know what she had for lunch, or what song she's listening to on the radio.


----------



## Starstarfish

So are you concerned about infidelity because of those Facebook connections? 

And the V/W thing is more than a preference, societies with a male oriented social and power structure have often codified it into law and backed it up with religion that women who fall outside of the "preference" can be sold, harmed, or killed and that doing so is a positive to honor.

So, sorry, it's been (and still is in some parts of the world) a bit more than who likes what.


----------



## Maria Canosa Gargano

Starstarfish said:


> So are you concerned about infidelity because of those Facebook connections?
> 
> And the V/W thing is more than a preference, societies with a male oriented social and power structure have often codified it into law and backed it up with religion that women who fall outside of the "preference" can be sold, harmed, or killed and that doing so is a positive to honor.
> 
> So, sorry, it's been (and still is in some parts of the world) a bit more than who likes what.


Excellent point. I think a fair number of us who are commenting on this do not live in societies where this is codified and law. None of us are worried about being stoned to death. Our discussion about this may seem laughable to women who live in societies that do. Both on what I am complaining about as having experienced it and also to those who say it doesn't exist.

It's a totally different level.


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

Starstarfish said:


> So are you concerned about infidelity because of those Facebook connections?


Personally? Not really. But I'm not so dishonest as to insist that the risk isn't there. People connecting with exes is a dangerous situation in a marriage. That fact is obviously incompatible with the argument that some have made on this thread that past relationships are negative and hardly ever remembered.



> And the V/W thing is more than a preference, societies with a male oriented social and power structure have often codified it into law and backed it up with religion that women who fall outside of the "preference" can be sold, harmed, or killed and that doing so is a positive to honor.
> 
> So, sorry, it's been (and still is in some parts of the world) a bit more than who likes what.


True. The question is why? Do you believe that men insisted on women being chaste for no particular reason? Or is it more plausible that, since men were writing the law, they wrote the law to reflect their own sexual preferences? I believe the latter.

Now, obviously society can acknowledge the sexual preferences of men in cruel and repressive ways, or in benign and liberated ways. But neither mode of acknowledgement actually changes the preferences at work.

I am against honor killing a woman for having premarital sex. But I am also against insisting that men abandon their preferences and adopt the preferences of women so that promiscuous women will always have men willing to marry them when they're ready to settle down.


----------



## couple

BronzeTorpedo said:


> It's not the words "wh0re" or "slvt" that women inherently object to. Those are just words. It's the concept behind those words that women find objectionable. And the argument that the concept is prostitution is laughable. The concept is promiscuous women. If women were to have a conference and introduce a new, unobjectionable word to communicate the concept of a promiscuous women, that word would immediately become objectionable because women don't like being identified as promiscuous.
> 
> And the issue of promiscuity is entirely different from the issue of libido, or enjoyment. There are promiscuous women who hate sex. There are virgins high libido. So don't argue the straw man that women with many partners are just normal with healthy sex drives. You can be all of that with few partners.


Sorry but it's insulting to women to say that (all) women find their sexual histories objectionable if they have had multiple and/or casual partners in their past. Essentially you are saying that a women can't embrace or even accept her own sexual history if it's less than pristine or if it would be considered promiscuous by some.

Likewise, if a woman accepts her own sexual history, she is not ashamed of it.


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

couple said:


> Sorry but it's insulting to women to say that (all) women find their sexual histories objectionable if they have had multiple and/or casual partners in their past. Essentially you are saying that a women can't embrace or even accept her own sexual history if it's less than pristine or if it would be considered promiscuous by some.
> 
> Likewise, if a woman accepts her own sexual history, she is not ashamed of it.


Once again, I'm speaking in generalities. I didn't use the word ALL because I'm not writing about ALL women. I'm writing about many women, or most women, or the average woman.

Yes, there are some women who are proud of their promiscuity. And, if those women aren't hypocritical, they don't mind being identified as promiscuous women. But it's hypocritical of women to claim to be proudly promiscuous, yet object to being identified as such.

And the source of it all is the sexual preferences of men. One of the preferences of men is for chaste women. So that is an area where women compete for the attention of men. So it's counterproductive to encourage women to be promiscuous and then try to shame men for not abandoning their preference for chaste women.


----------



## ConanHub

BronzeTorpedo said:


> Once again, I'm speaking in generalities. I didn't use the word ALL because I'm not writing about ALL women. I'm writing about many women, or most women, or the average woman.
> 
> Yes, there are some women who are proud of their promiscuity. And, if those women aren't hypocritical, they don't mind being identified as promiscuous women. But it's hypocritical of women to claim to be proudly promiscuous, yet object to being identified as such.
> 
> And the source of it all is the sexual preferences of men. One of the preferences of men is for chaste women. So that is an area where women compete for the attention of men. So it's counterproductive to encourage women to be promiscuous and then try to shame men for not abandoning their preference for chaste women.


Could be doing some convincing here. I am enjoying your conversation and clarity of points.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Maria Canosa Gargano

BronzeTorpedo said:


> Once again, I'm speaking in generalities. I didn't use the word ALL because I'm not writing about ALL women. I'm writing about many women, or most women, or the average woman.
> 
> Yes, there are some women who are proud of their promiscuity. And, if those women aren't hypocritical, they don't mind being identified as promiscuous women. But it's hypocritical of women to claim to be proudly promiscuous, yet object to being identified as such.
> 
> And the source of it all is the sexual preferences of men. One of the preferences of men is for chaste women. So that is an area where women compete for the attention of men. So it's counterproductive to encourage women to be promiscuous and then try to shame men for not abandoning their preference for chaste women.


Why do men prefer chaste women?

Is it an innate biological drive? Or do we think it is an innate biological drive because it is societally conditioned?

I don't have an answer. Just questions


----------



## ConanHub

Maria Canosa Gargano said:


> Why do men prefer chaste women?
> 
> Is it an innate biological drive? Or do we think it is an innate biological drive because it is societally conditioned?
> 
> I don't have an answer. Just questions


I don't know either but I am exploring.

I don't find promiscuity attractive. But honesty and self control are huge turn ons. So a woman could be promiscuous as well as honest and very good at exercising self control and I would, overall, be attracted to her. If she proved capable of loyalty in monogamy, I would have no problem marrying such a woman.

To be fair. Men who are promiscuous don't receive respect from me.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Maria Canosa Gargano

ConanHub said:


> I don't know either but I am exploring.
> 
> I don't find promiscuity attractive. But honesty and self control are huge turn ons. So a woman could be promiscuous as well as honest and very good at exercising self control and I would, overall, be attracted to her. If she proved capable of loyalty in monogamy, I would have no problem marrying such a woman.
> 
> To be fair. Men who are promiscuous don't receive respect from me.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I don't find promiscuity attractive in men but it must be coupled with a belief system about sex and self control also. How would his beliefs about sex complement mine? Sex to me is a spiritual act. Does he think that? Or is it just a recreational activity?

I think another thing I am confused about in this conversation is what is promiscuity? Is it certain acts? At what number does it become normal experiences to promiscuous? 

It reminds me of the question, how many rice does it take to make a pile. 

Also, many people and societies will have different ideas of promiscuous. This is why I am wondering how biological it is. In Saudi Arabia, I would be promiscuous if I held a man's hand. Is that a biological reaction? Extreme question, I know. 

I think my idea of promiscuity is very much shaped by my culture. If I met a man who had 3 or 5 partners, I would not consider him promiscuous, but perhaps if I was Mormon that might be different.


----------



## chillymorn

very interesting thread. I did not read the whole thing but it was interesting non the less.

why do men not want an experienced woman?

because of insecurities......will he measure up? will he be her best ? in a mans eyes if hes not rocking her world all in his world is not right. (at least most men. I read about some of the guys that their wives complain about not trying and I just don't get it pleasing a woman is some of lifes biggest pleasure at least for me)

man *****/woman ***** call it what you want but the term ***** to me is someone who uses sex to get what they want! could be money, could be possessions, could be security, could be fame could be just about anything.

so women who settled for the safe secure man instead of someone who they are attracted to and desire and love are indeed the biggest *****s of all !

how fickle after getting dumped by the guys,dudes,players they say I'm not going to go out with these type of men because they don't value me as a person and make me feel cheap and used so I will pick a safe secure man who values me and loves me. and then after ....say 3 kids and 10-15 yrs later I'll say well I just can't stay married to someone who doesn't do it for me any more.

It happens all the time!!!!!!

and you know what the sad part is.......I would bet my left nut if the woman would have opened up and was honest with her man about what she liked and her man was man enough to listen and communicate back what he liked the vast majority of people would be sexually compatible. 

don't get me wrong there will always be the out layers who wouldn't ever be compatible in many areas of their marriage but the human mind can and is very adaptable. 

just my honest opinion.


----------



## couple

BronzeTorpedo said:


> Once again, I'm speaking in generalities. I didn't use the word ALL because I'm not writing about ALL women. I'm writing about many women, or most women, or the average woman.
> 
> Yes, there are some women who are proud of their promiscuity. And, if those women aren't hypocritical, they don't mind being identified as promiscuous women. But it's hypocritical of women to claim to be proudly promiscuous, yet object to being identified as such.
> 
> And the source of it all is the sexual preferences of men. One of the preferences of men is for chaste women. So that is an area where women compete for the attention of men. So it's counterproductive to encourage women to be promiscuous and then try to shame men for not abandoning their preference for chaste women.


OK you didn't say 'all' but you did generalize that women find their own sexual histories objectionable if they involve multiple and/or casual partners (the concept of promiscuity). I reject this assumption. Such a view of themselves is not healthy and I don't think the 'average woman' finds her sexual history objectionable. Of course some women are ashamed of their sexual history and that's sad - perhaps helped to feel this way by people who assume that they would feel this way because it's 'normal' to find ones sexual choices objectionable and shameful if it's not pristine.

We risk getting caught up in an unproductive circle of semantics but a woman CAN be comfortable with her own sexual history without wanting people to label her as 'promiscuous' (remember though you yourself said that it's not the word, it's the concept). This is in no way hypocritical. Of course most women would say that they would not want people to label them as 'promiscuous'. It doesn't mean that those women find their own sexual histories objectionable. That's completely illogical. Most people want some level of privacy around their sexuality, even if it's related to their spouse or what they might do with themselves - completely unrelated to promiscuity. Wanting some level of privacy (whether a lot or a little) for their sexuality does not mean they find their own sexuality objectionable. That's preposterous. If a women feels no shame in her masturbating and does not find it objectionable, it doesn't mean she's OK to be labelled as a 'masturbater' by everyone. Likewise if she feels no shame in practicing bondage with her husband she probably does not want to be labelled for this.

Sorry but I really don't understand the fundamentals of your point and it just seems completely illogical.


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

Maria Canosa Gargano said:


> Why do men prefer chaste women?
> 
> Is it an innate biological drive? Or do we think it is an innate biological drive because it is societally conditioned?
> 
> I don't have an answer. Just questions


Given the fact that chastity is valued by men across the world in very different cultures, I tend to believe biology is the reason.


----------



## chillymorn

BronzeTorpedo said:


> Given the fact that chastity is valued by men across the world in very different cultures, I tend to believe biology is the reason.


no man want to raise another's child.

if shes chaste as you say the chances are better that it will be yours at least the first one.


----------



## Maria Canosa Gargano

BronzeTorpedo said:


> Given the fact that chastity is valued by men across the world in very different cultures, I tend to believe biology is the reason.



That may be a product of colonization. I am just not convinced that it is 100%biological. But I will never have the answer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyandry

From wikipedia. ( I understand this is a bad source but it is concise).

nthropologist Stephen Beckerman points out that at least 20 tribal societies accept that a child could, and ideally should, have more than one father, referring to it as "partible paternity."[14] This often results in the shared nurture of a child by multiple fathers in a form of polyandric relation to the mother, although this is not always the case.[15] One of the most well known examples is that of Trobriand "virgin birth." The matrilineal Trobriand Islanders recognize the importance of sex to reproduction but do not believe the male makes a contribution to the constitution of the child, who therefore remains attached to their mother's lineage alone. The mother's non-resident husbands are not recognized as fathers, although the mother's co-resident brothers are, since they are part of the mother's lineage.
Known cases[edit]

Polyandry in Tibet was a common practice and continues to a lesser extent today. In Tibet, polyandry has been outlawed since the Chinese takeover of the area, so it is difficult to measure the incidence of polyandry in what may have been the world's most polyandrous society.[16] Polyandry in India still exists among minorities, and also in Bhutan, and the northern parts of Nepal. Polyandry has been practised in several parts of India, such as Rajasthan, Ladakh and Zanskar, in the Jaunsar-Bawar region in Uttarakhand, among the Toda of South India,[16] and the Nishi of Arunachal Pradesh.[citation needed]
It also occurs or has occurred in Nigeria, the Nymba,[16] [clarification needed] and some pre-contact Polynesian societies,[17] though probably only among higher caste women.[18] It is also encountered in some regions of Yunnan and Sichuan regions of China, among the Mosuo people in China, and in some sub-Saharan African such as the Maasai people in Kenya and northern Tanzania[19] and American indigenous communities. The Guanches, the first known inhabitants of the Canary Islands, practiced polyandry until their disappearance.[20] The Zo'e tribe in the state of Pará on the Cuminapanema River, Brazil, also practice polyandry.[21] Polyandry was practiced in Celtic societies as women were allowed to own property and marry more than one husband.[citation needed]


----------



## ConanHub

Good points on non monogamy in cultures. Interesting that they are all defeated or extremely primitive /underdeveloped cultures.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Maria Canosa Gargano

ConanHub said:


> Good points on non monogamy in cultures. Interesting that they are all defeated or extremely primitive /underdeveloped cultures.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Well, they would call us primitive you know.

Just a few generations of industrialization and we are already talking about the end of how our societies are built.

They lasted for hundreds of generations.

Also, I studied Anthropology as my undergraduate (before pursuing the Public Health degree which I am trying to undo hahaha). In case that was not obvious in my culturally oriented posts.

But the idea of primitive societies is an outdated concept in Anthropology. It is not for political correctness, though you do get quite a lot of those types, but because it was based upon a certain set of standards that immediately benefited the societies that were judging other societies. 

What makes a society advanced? Is it the architecture, technology, ideas, equality, sustainability?

We could be primitive from many perspectives.


----------



## ConanHub

I am accurately portrayed by my avatar. I am speaking of course of advanced civilizations in technologies and warfare. Not all concepts in a superior civilization are superior but less advanced cultures are definitely defeated by superior ones.

I have a heavily Celtic heritage. I say if you are defeated, enjoy the food! &#55357;&#56841;
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Cletus

ConanHub said:


> Good points on non monogamy in cultures. Interesting that they are all defeated or extremely primitive /underdeveloped cultures.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Psst... there's a faction living in Utah who would like to have a word with you about your use of the term "primitive".


----------



## Maria Canosa Gargano

ConanHub said:


> I am accurately portrayed by my avatar. I am speaking of course of advanced civilizations in technologies and warfare. Not all concepts in a superior civilization are superior but less advanced cultures are definitely defeated by superior ones.
> 
> I have a heavily Celtic heritage. I say if you are defeated, enjoy the food! ��
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Hahaha. I like that style of thinking.

I am still going to have to disagree with that. But you have a fair assessment. 

I tend to be biased by longevity and social philosophies. That doesn't mean my assessment is correct.

It's like how my Neuroanatomy professor always said that we can't scientifically measure intelligence is but we all have an opinion of how to.


----------



## ConanHub

Cletus said:


> Psst... there's a faction living in Utah who would like to have a word with you about your use of the term "primitive".


Ahh. They're just riding on our coattails. They didn't develop on their own. But funny.&#55357;&#56833;
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Starstarfish

So are we arguing that subjugating women is just part of a superior civilization? 

Also, if so many men find "promiscuous" women distasteful and not relationship worthy, what do you do with the recommendations given to women on TAM that if they wait too long to sleep with a man they are dating, they'll get dumped and deserve it?

Where is all the shouting down of male "players" in threads where the makeup for a bad breakup is sewing oats all over town?


----------



## Maria Canosa Gargano

Starstarfish said:


> So are we arguing that subjugating women is just part of a superior civilization?
> 
> Also, if so many men find "promiscuous" women distasteful and not relationship worthy, what do you do with the recommendations given to women on TAM that if they wait too long to sleep with a man they are dating, they'll get dumped and deserve it?
> 
> Where is all the shouting down of male "players" in threads where the makeup for a bad breakup is sewing oats all over town?


You make a good point. I am truly sorry I am not going to directly address that. That is for someone more articulate than me.

But, I think part of the issue too is that it is a large mix of people who are responding while they go back and forth between extremes as they try to come to the middle.

TAM is very level-headed. Individual posters may not be, and those who have the most vile of opinions tend to congregate together and echo.


----------



## Cletus

Starstarfish said:


> So are we arguing that subjugating women is just part of a superior civilization?
> 
> Also, if so many men find "promiscuous" women distasteful and not relationship worthy, what do you do with the recommendations given to women on TAM that if they wait too long to sleep with a man they are dating, they'll get dumped and deserve it?
> 
> Where is all the shouting down of male "players" in threads where the makeup for a bad breakup is sewing oats all over town?


There's no one-size-fits-all answer for that. The only way to not get dumped from either having sex too early or having sex too late is to have Goldilocks sex - at just the right time, and that time is partner specific. Guess wrong, and you risk being shown the door.

It's just one more part of the glorious mating ritual, and it's not gender specific. As with everything in life, you have to find someone who is a match for _you_, not a match for some weighted average of the whole population.


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

Starstarfish said:


> So are we arguing that subjugating women is just part of a superior civilization?


I thought we were discussing chastity in women as it relates to the preferences of men. Nobody is advocating for mandating chastity in women.



> Also, if so many men find "promiscuous" women distasteful and not relationship worthy, what do you do with the recommendations given to women on TAM that if they wait too long to sleep with a man they are dating, they'll get dumped and deserve it?


If a woman wants to wait for marriage, she should look for a man who shares her views. If she wants to have a one night stand, it shouldn't be a problem to find a man to accommodate her. If she's looking for a casual, nonsexual relationship, then getting dumped for not having sex shouldn't be all that devastating.



> Where is all the shouting down of male "players" in threads where the makeup for a bad breakup is sewing oats all over town?


I won't shout down male players any more than I'll shout down promiscuous women. They're both sexual strategies with pros and cons. Promiscuity has disadvantages in both sexes. But the disadvantages are different. And I see nothing to be gained by trying to remove the disadvantages, or pretend that they don't exist.


----------



## Starstarfish

Okay, I'll bite.

What do you see as the disadvantages to male promiscuity?


----------



## EleGirl

chillymorn said:


> no man want to raise another's child.
> 
> if shes chaste as you say the chances are better that it will be yours at least the first one.


All a person has to do is wait a few months between sex partners to make sure that a child is the husband's child.

Some societies had and some still do, a law that a woman has to wait 3 months before re-marrying so make sure of this.


----------



## Marduk

Starstarfish said:


> Okay, I'll bite.
> 
> What do you see as the disadvantages to male promiscuity?


I can tell you that I've been slvt shamed by more women than I've ever done to them. 

Being perceived as a player is a hard place to dig yourself out of when the time comes for a serious relationship.


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

Starstarfish said:


> Okay, I'll bite.
> 
> What do you see as the disadvantages to male promiscuity?


You're going to pretend there aren't any? If you're unwilling to have a serious conversation that goes beyond the meme that men are responsible for any negative consequences for promiscuous women, then I'm unwilling to bite. I'll let you return to your slogans.


----------



## Jellybeans

This Ladies Lounge thread has gone from asking the women of TAM to shed light/post about what their experiences are with the virgin/wh0re thing/how it has affected them in their lives to men saying they are slvt shamed and male promiscuity.

Should've guessed it long ago. LOL.


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

EleGirl said:


> All a person has to do is wait a few months between sex partners to make sure that a child is the husband's child.
> 
> Some societies had and some still do, a law that a woman has to wait 3 months before re-marrying so make sure of this.


So, in your opinion, promiscuous women are serial monogamists who only have one sexual partner at a time, and are willing to wait months between partners? If that's true, then how do so many cases of mistaken paternity happen?


----------



## BronzeTorpedo

Jellybeans said:


> This Ladies Lounge thread has gone from asking the women of TAM to shed light/post about what their experiences are with the virgin/wh0re thing/how it has affected them in their lives to men saying they are slvt shamed and male promiscuity.
> 
> Should've guessed it long ago. LOL.


I apologize for invading your echo chamber. I'll leave now for other boards. Feel free to go back to your memes of how awful promiscuous men are and how great promiscuous women are. About how unfair it is that men have different sexual preferences than women do. And about how men are ultimately to blame for all the negative consequences that happen when the behavior of women sometimes run contrary to the preferences of men.

I assume that you'll grant the same courtesy of staying out of the Men's forum, yes?


----------



## Married but Happy

ConanHub said:


> Good points on non monogamy in cultures. Interesting that they are all defeated or extremely primitive /underdeveloped cultures.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Cheating is also a form of non-monogamy. It also seems to be highly prevalent in first world cultures. We are defeating ourselves, apparently.


----------



## Jellybeans

BronzeTorpedo said:


> I apologize for invading your echo chamber. I'll leave now for other boards. *Feel free to go back to your memes of how awful promiscuous men are and how great promiscuous women are. About how unfair it is that men have different sexual preferences than women do. *And about how men are ultimately to blame for all the negative consequences that happen when the behavior of women sometimes run contrary to the preferences of men.
> 
> I assume that you'll grant the same courtesy of staying out of the Men's forum, yes?


Did somebody piss in your Cheerios this morning? You sound very angry. 

What memes are you talking about? I never said that "promiscuous men are awful" or how "unfair it is that men have different sexual preferences" or that "men are ultimately to blame for all the negative consequences that happen."

I would appreciate if you did not put words in my mouth.


----------



## Jellybeans

Married but Happy said:


> Cheating is also a form of non-monogamy. It also seems to be highly prevalent in first world cultures. We are defeating ourselves, apparently.


I don't know about that, Married. Cheating has been around since the beginning of time.


----------



## Starstarfish

> You're going to pretend there aren't any? If you're unwilling to have a serious conversation that goes beyond the meme that men are responsible for any negative consequences for promiscuous women, then I'm unwilling to bite. I'll let you return to your slogans.


I know that there are potential legal and financial consequences for male promiscuity. But do I feel there are social ramifications? 

Hmm. None that I really see. 




> About how unfair it is that men have different sexual preferences than women do. And about how men are ultimately to blame for all the negative consequences that happen when the behavior of women sometimes run contrary to the preferences of men.


Right. Men have the sexual preferences that they marry inexperienced virgins who then transform into amazing partners who want nothing but to do anal and give amazing blow jobs. And if you don't do those things with enough frequency, he can come to forums like TAM and complain what a terrible, ungiving wife you are. 

But you know, when you get s!ut shamed or beated or killed, I mean men aren't to blame, you are just running contrary to what they want ... so what else should you expect? Just get with the program already. 

Do people make schlock horror movies about s!ut shaming a male character by taking photos of them drunk and then further s!ut shaming them until they kill themselves only to have that dumb s!ut return as a vengeful ghost?

No? Just saw a preview last night for one about a female character.


----------



## Married but Happy

Jellybeans said:


> I don't know about that, Married. Cheating has been around since the beginning of time.


 Of course that's true. But non-monogamy being a third-world phenomenon as claimed isn't realistic.


----------



## *LittleDeer*

BronzeTorpedo said:


> So, in your opinion, promiscuous women are serial monogamists who only have one sexual partner at a time, and are willing to wait months between partners? If that's true, then how do so many cases of mistaken paternity happen?


Here is a really interesting article. 

The fatherhood myth • Inside Story

I have read a lot about mistaken paternity. It is not very common at all.


----------



## Cletus

*LittleDeer* said:


> Here is a really interesting article.
> 
> The fatherhood myth • Inside Story
> 
> I have read a lot about mistaken paternity. It is not very common at all.


~3% seems to be the most reliable figure for typical Western civilizations.


----------



## EleGirl

BronzeTorpedo said:


> So, in your opinion, promiscuous women are serial monogamists who only have one sexual partner at a time, and are willing to wait months between partners? If that's true, then how do so many cases of mistaken paternity happen?


Wow.. talk about twisting what I posted. I was responding to one particular point.

I'm not sure why you are spewing anger all over the place. But leave me out of your little anger fest.


----------



## vellocet

DanaS said:


> I HATE how so many men do this!


You hate men.....period.


----------



## doubletrouble

EleGirl said:


> Past relationships are in the past because they failed. Why would someone spend any time at all thinking about sex in past relationships, reliving something that fail and might have very bad feelings associated with it?
> 
> Do the men who are concerned about being compared to other men, spend time comparing their wife to other women they have been with? If not.. why would they think that women in general do this?


My W had somewhere around 10 partners before me. The only one I think about is OM. Had he not been in the picture, I wouldn't think SHE thinks about other men much at all. But there are my weak moments when I think she thinks about him. I probably think more about him/them than she does, tbh.

But in that case, my heart and male ego were seriously bruised (amazing I only call it bruising now, and two years ago it was put through a meat grinder and burnt). "Normally," her history wouldn't be a problem for me. I have one, too.


----------

