It does surprise me to meet men who are uncomfortable with that sort of thing. I mean, I get it on an intellectual level, but I don't really empathize with it.
Of course, if my significant other asked me, "Hey, my other boyfriend's roommates are being fucktards, do you mind if we use your bed to have sex while you're at work?" I'd say "Yeah, sure, feel free, just change the sheets after." I know this because, well, I have been asked that and that was pretty much what I said. So I don't think I have the same views on monogamy as 99.999% of the population.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
I may have learned something about myself just now.
See, thinking about it, if I was asked that, my first reaction would probably be *strangle*.
Fortunately, I will never be in such a situation. She would not do that to me.
Church on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
0
Options
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
edited November 2007
Feral, you degenerate.
Not about the sex stuff, cause I'm only a few points less liberal on that score, but people sleeping in your bed when you're not there? Ewww. I am renowned for my indulgent patience with just about anything but I nearly put a fist through my wall when I discovered my stepbrother naked and passed out in mine. His room was all of twelve feet away, there was no excuse.
This is the same girl who later brought a really hot, buxom, 19-year-old, nudity-friendly, brilliant, bisexual blonde college student home. I knew she was over but we had not yet been formally introduced. I walked out of my bedroom and literally ran into her in the hallway, wearing nary but a smile.
Sadly, I never ended up doing anything with her. She had a bit of anxiety about men and I was a bit intimidated by her. (She was really hot and really intelligent.) I wasn't quite as gung-ho then as I am now.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
Wait, you're ok with your SO having sex with another guy?
Not like all the time, but she sometimes requested a special dispensation and I was cool with that. To be honest I liked the idea of being with a girl who was that unapologetically predatory. But that was just the one relationship, most girls I've dated have been right smack in the middle of the whitebread bell curve. Which is fine too.
I could never understand the casual attitude about sex. I mean, I don't agree with Americans' puritanical views on sexuality. I'm more referring to the "hookup" type mentality. I couldn't possibly enjoy sex with a guy with whom I had no deep emotional connection. Even if my boyfriend told me to go out and have sex with other people, I don't think I could do it.
Gah, no callback for Hacksaw. Goodbye, hopes and dreams.
At least you have TF2.
TF2 will never betray you.
TF2 will never hurt you.
TF2 will never leave you stranded at the altar holding a ring surrounded by the pitying looks of your loved ones.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
0
Options
HacksawJ. Duggan Esq.Wrestler at LawRegistered Userregular
Wait, you're ok with your SO having sex with another guy?
Never. Never ever ever ever. If that ever happened I'd sneak into the bastard's room in the middle of the night, chain him to his mattress, then pry his teeth out and put them on a necklace and then give it to her, and make her promise to keep it so it wouldn't happen again.
In fact, that is probably the only thing that would ever happen to make me act so maliciously. I'm normally not a violent person at all. I'm reluctant to get even into a fistfight, even if someone attacks me.
Church on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
0
Options
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
edited November 2007
yeah, Church, that's your creepy gland talking again.
Jacobkosh on
0
Options
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
I could never understand the casual attitude about sex. I mean, I don't agree with Americans' puritanical views on sexuality. I'm more referring to the "hookup" type mentality. I couldn't possibly enjoy sex with a guy with whom I had no deep emotional connection. Even if my boyfriend told me to go out and have sex with other people, I don't think I could do it.
Honestly, I'm not terribly interested in sex without an intellectual or emotional connection of some kind. It doesn't have to be deep romantic life-long true love or anything like that, but the person has to engage me on a mental level before I'm interested. That said, it's pretty easy to engage me on that level, the right person can do it during the course of a single conversation.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
yeah, Church, that's your creepy gland talking again.
I don't care if I sound creepy. I've given up my home, my family, and my childhood to the whims of other men, but my woman is sacred. Sacred, I say. If there is a god, I pray he have mercy on anyone that touches her; I will not.
I could never understand the casual attitude about sex. I mean, I don't agree with Americans' puritanical views on sexuality. I'm more referring to the "hookup" type mentality. I couldn't possibly enjoy sex with a guy with whom I had no deep emotional connection. Even if my boyfriend told me to go out and have sex with other people, I don't think I could do it.
Honestly, I'm not terribly interested in sex without an intellectual or emotional connection of some kind. It doesn't have to be deep romantic life-long true love or anything like that, but the person has to engage me on a mental level before I'm interested. That said, it's pretty easy to engage me on that level, the right person can do it during the course of a single conversation.
I have a theory that guys have such a different outlook on sex compared to girls, on average, because of the difference in anatomy. You stick yours into something, while we get something stuck inside us. It probably takes more trust/whatevers for one to let something foreign be stuck inside than to stick a portion of one's anatomy into something foreign.
I could never understand the casual attitude about sex. I mean, I don't agree with Americans' puritanical views on sexuality. I'm more referring to the "hookup" type mentality. I couldn't possibly enjoy sex with a guy with whom I had no deep emotional connection. Even if my boyfriend told me to go out and have sex with other people, I don't think I could do it.
Diff'rent strokes/folks.
My stance has always been equality in however things are to play out. If they can sleep around I can sleep around, so long as everyone gets tested. If we agree to go steady and exclusive, steady and exclusive it is.
Admittedly, this may have at least partly developed via my anti-hypocrisy instinct.
In acknowledging that threesomes would be hawt, I no longer had any kind of internal argument for automatic exclusivity, so I abandoned it.
--
I have Halloween pics. Of myself. Because seriously even Fresno's Halloweens are a big shrug.
In acknowledging that threesomes would be hawt, I no longer had any kind of internal argument for automatic exclusivity, so I abandoned it.
Yeah, I actually don't find threesomes appealing. No logical contradictions for me!
Though I have to admit there have been times when I questioned the wisdom of possibly only having sex with one person my entire life. It seems like I should expand my experience, for the sake of knowledge.
IreneDAdler on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
0
Options
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
I don't care if I sound creepy. I've given up my home, my family, and my childhood to the whims of other men, but my woman is sacred. Sacred, I say. If there is a god, I pray he have mercy on anyone that touches her; I will not.
Dude. Women are not televisions or jewels. They don't sit around the house helplessly to be stolen by bad men. If your girl cheats on you it means that either there was a problem in your relationship to begin with or that she has honesty issues. Either way beating people up about it, while understandable in the abstract, is retarded. Other people do not belong to you. Period.
I have a theory that guys have such a different outlook on sex compared to girls, on average, because of the difference in anatomy. You stick yours into something, while we get something stuck inside us. It probably takes more trust/whatevers for one to let something foreign be stuck inside than to stick a portion of one's anatomy into something foreign.
True, but lots of gay men have things put in them too, and while I know "promiscuous gay" is a stereotype I also know some bottoms who really get around.
I have a theory that guys have such a different outlook on sex compared to girls, on average, because of the difference in anatomy. You stick yours into something, while we get something stuck inside us. It probably takes more trust/whatevers for one to let something foreign be stuck inside than to stick a portion of one's anatomy into something foreign.
Yeah, I've thought about that before, too. Frankly though I generally take the position that when it comes to sexual behavior, if I'm going to choose an explanation between nature and nurture, I'm going to choose nurture. At the very least, I'd be inclined to believe that the differences in behavior we're talking about, if they have biological underpinnings, are probably more due to hormonal differences or differences in brain structure than due to differences in genital shape.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
True, but lots of gay men have things put in them too, and while I know "promiscuous gay" is a stereotype I also know some bottoms who really get around.
Yep, and I've known plenty of women who have no problems having casual penetrative sex, and I'm not going to accept the Dr. Drew answer that their willingness to be promiscuous has anything to do with having been abused or otherwise traumatized earlier in life.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
I don't care if I sound creepy. I've given up my home, my family, and my childhood to the whims of other men, but my woman is sacred. Sacred, I say. If there is a god, I pray he have mercy on anyone that touches her; I will not.
Dude. Women are not televisions or jewels. They don't sit around the house helplessly to be stolen by bad men. If your girl cheats on you it means that either there was a problem in your relationship to begin with or that she has honesty issues. Either way beating people up about it, while understandable in the abstract, is retarded. Other people do not belong to you. Period.
Of course not. But the girl I'm with now would never willingly let another man touch her. I know her, and I know that.
And no, I don't think I'd hurt anyone. But I would really really really want to.
Yeah, I've thought about that before, too. Frankly though I generally take the position that when it comes to sexual behavior, if I'm going to choose an explanation between nature and nurture, I'm going to choose nurture. At the very least, I'd be inclined to believe that the differences in behavior we're talking about, if they have biological underpinnings, are probably more due to hormonal differences or differences in brain structure than due to differences in genital shape.
Nature and nurture aren't mutually exclusive, you know. I think that nature sets a base pattern (men are generally more liberal about sexy times than women), and nurture produces variations in that pattern (many women are more promiscuous than many men).
Yeah, I've thought about that before, too. Frankly though I generally take the position that when it comes to sexual behavior, if I'm going to choose an explanation between nature and nurture, I'm going to choose nurture. At the very least, I'd be inclined to believe that the differences in behavior we're talking about, if they have biological underpinnings, are probably more due to hormonal differences or differences in brain structure than due to differences in genital shape.
Nature and nurture aren't mutually exclusive, you know. I think that nature sets a base pattern (men are generally more liberal about sexy times than women), and nurture produces variations in that pattern (many women are more promiscuous than many men).
Oh, I know. And nature doesn't necessarily mean hard-wired.
I'm just saying that I'm by default skeptical of biological explanations for differences in male and female sexual behavior. It would take a lot of hard evidence to convince me that this particular difference (as most differences) between male and female behavior is not primarily culturally ingrained.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
0
Options
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
edited November 2007
I was nurtured by Lynda Carter, Princess Leia, and the Bionic Woman. So it guess it makes sense that I go for girls who seem helpless but can actually crush cars between their thighs, and then develop massive coke habits and write tell-all novels.
I was nurtured by Lynda Carter, Princess Leia, and the Bionic Woman. So it guess it makes sense that I go for girls who seem helpless but can actually crush cars between their thighs, and then develop massive coke habits and write tell-all novels.
You too?
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
0
Options
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
At least we're not alone. You read comics? Grant Morrison's Bulleteer was like a freaky guided tour of my Freudian unconscious. It had all that stuff and was vaguely embarrassing but also awesome.
Oh, don't get me started on slash, or fanfic in general.
I'm one of these fuddy-duddies who think books should be written by authors instead of weird autistic manchildren. It's an unpopular position to take on the internet, but I feel the evidence is on my side.
EDIT: it was a joke about how I killed [chat], but you ruined it by posting!
Seriously, though, I've always tended to like either tomboys or nerdy girls.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
0
Options
Mojo_JojoWe are only now beginning to understand the full power and ramifications of sexual intercourseRegistered Userregular
edited November 2007
The Joker seems a fairly simple and effective costume for a fancy dress party. The only hard part would be the purple jacket, although I'm sure that some emo-goth store or other will sell them. I may pick up the supplies so I have an in case of emergency costume.
Mojo_Jojo on
Homogeneous distribution of your varieties of amuse-gueule
The Joker seems a fairly simple and effective costume for a fancy dress party. The only hard part would be the purple jacket, although I'm sure that some emo-goth store or other will sell them. I may pick up the supplies so I have an in case of emergency costume.
Smiling all night would be painful.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
In acknowledging that threesomes would be hawt, I no longer had any kind of internal argument for automatic exclusivity, so I abandoned it.
Yeah, I actually don't find threesomes appealing. No logical contradictions for me!
Though I have to admit there have been times when I questioned the wisdom of possibly only having sex with one person my entire life. It seems like I should expand my experience, for the sake of knowledge.
Honestly, I think a large part of my interest in multiple sex partners is 1) barely having any association with straight women at all 2) not trusting any other guy to not treat them like crap
I used to fantasize about my female friends falling for each other so I wouldn't have to worry about them anymore. :P
Incenjucar on
0
Options
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
edited November 2007
Paint the smile on and do a Heath Ledger Joker. Guy did it at the party I was at last weekend and it worked marvelously.
Posts
To be honest, I was. I don't like the idea of anyone else with her.
But it would be hawt.
Also, yes, Irene's answer was great.
On the other hand, I am slightly worried about this being a trap.
On the other other hand, I don't think she's malicious enough to lay a trap. Not even a mouse trap.
It does surprise me to meet men who are uncomfortable with that sort of thing. I mean, I get it on an intellectual level, but I don't really empathize with it.
Of course, if my significant other asked me, "Hey, my other boyfriend's roommates are being fucktards, do you mind if we use your bed to have sex while you're at work?" I'd say "Yeah, sure, feel free, just change the sheets after." I know this because, well, I have been asked that and that was pretty much what I said. So I don't think I have the same views on monogamy as 99.999% of the population.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
See, thinking about it, if I was asked that, my first reaction would probably be *strangle*.
Fortunately, I will never be in such a situation. She would not do that to me.
Not about the sex stuff, cause I'm only a few points less liberal on that score, but people sleeping in your bed when you're not there? Ewww. I am renowned for my indulgent patience with just about anything but I nearly put a fist through my wall when I discovered my stepbrother naked and passed out in mine. His room was all of twelve feet away, there was no excuse.
Sadly, I never ended up doing anything with her. She had a bit of anxiety about men and I was a bit intimidated by her. (She was really hot and really intelligent.) I wasn't quite as gung-ho then as I am now.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Yes, as long as none of the following are brought home: diseases, babies, hard drugs, or drama of any sort.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Not like all the time, but she sometimes requested a special dispensation and I was cool with that. To be honest I liked the idea of being with a girl who was that unapologetically predatory. But that was just the one relationship, most girls I've dated have been right smack in the middle of the whitebread bell curve. Which is fine too.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
At least you have TF2.
TF2 will never betray you.
TF2 will never hurt you.
TF2 will never leave you stranded at the altar holding a ring surrounded by the pitying looks of your loved ones.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Never. Never ever ever ever. If that ever happened I'd sneak into the bastard's room in the middle of the night, chain him to his mattress, then pry his teeth out and put them on a necklace and then give it to her, and make her promise to keep it so it wouldn't happen again.
In fact, that is probably the only thing that would ever happen to make me act so maliciously. I'm normally not a violent person at all. I'm reluctant to get even into a fistfight, even if someone attacks me.
"You have lost your connection to the host"
:x:x:x:x
Honestly, I'm not terribly interested in sex without an intellectual or emotional connection of some kind. It doesn't have to be deep romantic life-long true love or anything like that, but the person has to engage me on a mental level before I'm interested. That said, it's pretty easy to engage me on that level, the right person can do it during the course of a single conversation.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
I don't care if I sound creepy. I've given up my home, my family, and my childhood to the whims of other men, but my woman is sacred. Sacred, I say. If there is a god, I pray he have mercy on anyone that touches her; I will not.
I have a theory that guys have such a different outlook on sex compared to girls, on average, because of the difference in anatomy. You stick yours into something, while we get something stuck inside us. It probably takes more trust/whatevers for one to let something foreign be stuck inside than to stick a portion of one's anatomy into something foreign.
Diff'rent strokes/folks.
My stance has always been equality in however things are to play out. If they can sleep around I can sleep around, so long as everyone gets tested. If we agree to go steady and exclusive, steady and exclusive it is.
Admittedly, this may have at least partly developed via my anti-hypocrisy instinct.
In acknowledging that threesomes would be hawt, I no longer had any kind of internal argument for automatic exclusivity, so I abandoned it.
--
I have Halloween pics. Of myself. Because seriously even Fresno's Halloweens are a big shrug.
Yeah, I actually don't find threesomes appealing. No logical contradictions for me!
Though I have to admit there have been times when I questioned the wisdom of possibly only having sex with one person my entire life. It seems like I should expand my experience, for the sake of knowledge.
Dude. Women are not televisions or jewels. They don't sit around the house helplessly to be stolen by bad men. If your girl cheats on you it means that either there was a problem in your relationship to begin with or that she has honesty issues. Either way beating people up about it, while understandable in the abstract, is retarded. Other people do not belong to you. Period.
True, but lots of gay men have things put in them too, and while I know "promiscuous gay" is a stereotype I also know some bottoms who really get around.
Yeah, I've thought about that before, too. Frankly though I generally take the position that when it comes to sexual behavior, if I'm going to choose an explanation between nature and nurture, I'm going to choose nurture. At the very least, I'd be inclined to believe that the differences in behavior we're talking about, if they have biological underpinnings, are probably more due to hormonal differences or differences in brain structure than due to differences in genital shape.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Yep, and I've known plenty of women who have no problems having casual penetrative sex, and I'm not going to accept the Dr. Drew answer that their willingness to be promiscuous has anything to do with having been abused or otherwise traumatized earlier in life.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Of course not. But the girl I'm with now would never willingly let another man touch her. I know her, and I know that.
And no, I don't think I'd hurt anyone. But I would really really really want to.
Nature and nurture aren't mutually exclusive, you know. I think that nature sets a base pattern (men are generally more liberal about sexy times than women), and nurture produces variations in that pattern (many women are more promiscuous than many men).
Oh, I know. And nature doesn't necessarily mean hard-wired.
I'm just saying that I'm by default skeptical of biological explanations for differences in male and female sexual behavior. It would take a lot of hard evidence to convince me that this particular difference (as most differences) between male and female behavior is not primarily culturally ingrained.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
You too?
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
hi5
At least we're not alone. You read comics? Grant Morrison's Bulleteer was like a freaky guided tour of my Freudian unconscious. It had all that stuff and was vaguely embarrassing but also awesome.
edit: jacob, what was that? And why did you delete it?
Oh, don't get me started on slash, or fanfic in general.
I'm one of these fuddy-duddies who think books should be written by authors instead of weird autistic manchildren. It's an unpopular position to take on the internet, but I feel the evidence is on my side.
EDIT: it was a joke about how I killed [chat], but you ruined it by posting!
Seriously, though, I've always tended to like either tomboys or nerdy girls.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Yeah, actually there was a new one on...
Uh....
GIRLS GIRLS I LIKE GIRLS.
Smiling all night would be painful.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
I generally stick to straight fanfic when I delve into that den of madness.
Of course, that was a good 3-4 years ago, so eh.
I may end up doing something for NaNoWriMo. I fear for the last fragments of my sanity.
Honestly, I think a large part of my interest in multiple sex partners is 1) barely having any association with straight women at all 2) not trusting any other guy to not treat them like crap
I used to fantasize about my female friends falling for each other so I wouldn't have to worry about them anymore. :P