As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options

The Virginity Fetish

1234689

Posts

  • Options
    IreneDAdlerIreneDAdler Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    My biggest issue is that for Men in america we have the choice. You can sleep with someone or not and there is no negative connotation. But if a woman god forbid decides to sleep with men, well she better hope she lives in an enlightened area or only sleeps with a couple.

    What do you call a man who sleeps with a lot of women? A stud. What do you call a woman who sleeps with a lot of men? A slut. Doesn't seem too open and non judgemental does it?

    Don't you know, Preach? A woman doesn't enjoy sex*, and so the only possible reason she would do it is to get jewelery.

    *
    Because men really suck at it.

    IreneDAdler on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    HakkekageHakkekage Space Whore Academy summa cum laudeRegistered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    My biggest issue is that for Men in america we have the choice. You can sleep with someone or not and there is no negative connotation. But if a woman god forbid decides to sleep with men, well she better hope she lives in an enlightened area or only sleeps with a couple.

    What do you call a man who sleeps with a lot of women? A stud. What do you call a woman who sleeps with a lot of men? A slut. Doesn't seem too open and non judgemental does it?

    Yeah I really, really, really hate this double standard. It makes me seethe.

    Hakkekage on
    3DS: 2165 - 6538 - 3417
    NNID: Hakkekage
  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    an_alt wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    What do you call a man who sleeps with a lot of women? A stud. What do you call a woman who sleeps with a lot of men? A slut. Doesn't seem too open and non judgemental does it?

    On the other hand, if you took a poll of women in America and asked them if they would prefer to marry a guy with more than fifty partners, I'm guessing the results would be lower than Bush's approval numbers. Getting called a stud might work well with "the boys", but generally isn't looked upon so kindly by women as it tends to have a connotation of someone who uses people.

    Honestly I don't believe the numbers would be that low, ignoring the fact outside of bravado there is a limited possibility of a male ever hitting 50 partners during normal sexual relations in a life time, let alone marrying age.

    I bet if you asked women and men "Would you marry a partner who had slept with 10 people previous to your relationship?" Women would answer in the affirmative more then men by a considerable margin.

    Preacher on
    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    redxredx I(x)=2(x)+1 whole numbersRegistered User regular
    edited June 2008
    isn't manwhore the common term these days anyway? I mean, I wasn't in a frat, so it's been a while since I've heard anyone be called a stud.

    Player maybe, but that kinda does have negative connotations to it.

    Stud? really? I swear to god at one point I was hip.

    redx on
    They moistly come out at night, moistly.
  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited June 2008

    Don't you know, Preach? A woman doesn't enjoy sex*, and so the only possible reason she would do it is to get jewelery.

    *
    Because men really suck at it.

    Yet another stereotype that gets bandied about glad you brought it up Irene. Women aren't supposed to enjoy sex, or themselves, its all icky gross stuff and until a big strong male shows them how to use their body to get that man off they are to remain cloistered.

    Preacher on
    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    PlutocracyPlutocracy regular
    edited June 2008
    Preacher wrote: »

    Honestly I don't believe the numbers would be that low, ignoring the fact outside of bravado there is a limited possibility of a male ever hitting 50 partners during normal sexual relations in a life time, let alone marrying age.

    I bet if you asked women and men "Would you marry a partner who had slept with 10 people previous to your relationship?" Women would answer in the affirmative more then men by a considerable margin.

    Couldn't that be attributed to the fact that for a woman to truly enjoy sexual intercourse she needs a guy who knows what he's doing while men can reach orgasm more easily (generally speaking)?

    Plutocracy on
    They fuck you up, your mum and dad.
    They may not mean to, but they do.
    They fill you with the faults they had
    And add some extra, just for you.
  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    redx wrote: »
    isn't manwhore the common term these days anyway? I mean, I wasn't in a frat, so it's been a while since I've heard anyone be called a stud.

    Player maybe, but that kinda does have negative connotations to it.

    Stud? really? I swear to god at one point I was hip.

    Not as a negative. Look at TV, Movies, magazines. Men are the sexual predators and females their sheep. Very rarely is a positive female sexual role model ever shown. If a woman likes sex shes some kind of psycho, has a mental disorder, or shes a ball buster. Hell they'll compare a woman to a male and try and make it seem like its a negative comparison.

    Preacher on
    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    IreneDAdlerIreneDAdler Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    an_alt wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    What do you call a man who sleeps with a lot of women? A stud. What do you call a woman who sleeps with a lot of men? A slut. Doesn't seem too open and non judgemental does it?

    On the other hand, if you took a poll of women in America and asked them if they would prefer to marry a guy with more than fifty partners, I'm guessing the results would be lower than Bush's approval numbers. Getting called a stud might work well with "the boys", but generally isn't looked upon so kindly by women as it tends to have a connotation of someone who uses people.

    Honestly I don't believe the numbers would be that low, ignoring the fact outside of bravado there is a limited possibility of a male ever hitting 50 partners during normal sexual relations in a life time, let alone marrying age.

    I bet if you asked women and men "Would you marry a partner who had slept with 10 people previous to your relationship?" Women would answer in the affirmative more then men by a considerable margin.

    I really doubt that. Especially if you phrase the question that way. Outside of any context, the idea of someone who has had a lot of sexual partners is going to raise brows, no matter the gender. I mean, if the only thing I know about this hypothetical person is that he's extremely promiscuous, I wouldn't want to marry this hypothetical person.

    IreneDAdler on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    TrowizillaTrowizilla Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Plutocracy wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »

    Honestly I don't believe the numbers would be that low, ignoring the fact outside of bravado there is a limited possibility of a male ever hitting 50 partners during normal sexual relations in a life time, let alone marrying age.

    I bet if you asked women and men "Would you marry a partner who had slept with 10 people previous to your relationship?" Women would answer in the affirmative more then men by a considerable margin.

    Couldn't that be attributed to the fact that for a woman to truly enjoy sexual intercourse she needs a guy who knows what he's doing while men can reach orgasm more easily?

    From my own (ahem) research, it's just as hard to get a man off as it is to get a woman off. We're not born with blowjob instructions, you know. Men are, however, more encouraged to explore their own bodies, and thus are likelier to be able to get themselves off during sex.

    Trowizilla on
  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Plutocracy wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »

    Honestly I don't believe the numbers would be that low, ignoring the fact outside of bravado there is a limited possibility of a male ever hitting 50 partners during normal sexual relations in a life time, let alone marrying age.

    I bet if you asked women and men "Would you marry a partner who had slept with 10 people previous to your relationship?" Women would answer in the affirmative more then men by a considerable margin.

    Couldn't that be attributed to the fact that for a woman to truly enjoy sexual intercourse she needs a guy who knows what he's doing while men can reach orgasm more easily?

    I would say its more society saying that for men if you don't have sex by a certain age your a loser/geek/ugly. So a woman can not really ever expect to be with a man who hasn't been with other women. And despite that pressure being out there for men, society expects women to maintain their sanctity so that when a man conquers them and takes them back to his cave she's ready.

    I doubt it has anything to do with a woman not being able to orgasm with an inexperienced man since that goes both way in my experience.

    Preacher on
    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    anableanable North TexasRegistered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    redx wrote: »
    isn't manwhore the common term these days anyway? I mean, I wasn't in a frat, so it's been a while since I've heard anyone be called a stud.

    Player maybe, but that kinda does have negative connotations to it.

    Stud? really? I swear to god at one point I was hip.

    Not as a negative. Look at TV, Movies, magazines. Men are the sexual predators and females their sheep. Very rarely is a positive female sexual role model ever shown. If a woman likes sex shes some kind of psycho, has a mental disorder, or shes a ball buster. Hell they'll compare a woman to a male and try and make it seem like its a negative comparison.

    While only marginally related, I'm reminded of this chart about females playing lead roles in movies. Even here in America, as a society, we aren't anywhere near viewing woman as being independent/strong/viable without a man.

    anable on
  • Options
    PlutocracyPlutocracy regular
    edited June 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    redx wrote: »
    isn't manwhore the common term these days anyway? I mean, I wasn't in a frat, so it's been a while since I've heard anyone be called a stud.

    Player maybe, but that kinda does have negative connotations to it.

    Stud? really? I swear to god at one point I was hip.

    Not as a negative. Look at TV, Movies, magazines. Men are the sexual predators and females their sheep. Very rarely is a positive female sexual role model ever shown. If a woman likes sex shes some kind of psycho, has a mental disorder, or shes a ball buster. Hell they'll compare a woman to a male and try and make it seem like its a negative comparison.

    I don't recall the Sex in the City characters being given those negative associations, although you can still argue that the fact that it's so popular is purely because it displays promiscuity from a female perspective in relatively liberal way.

    Plutocracy on
    They fuck you up, your mum and dad.
    They may not mean to, but they do.
    They fill you with the faults they had
    And add some extra, just for you.
  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    an_alt wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    What do you call a man who sleeps with a lot of women? A stud. What do you call a woman who sleeps with a lot of men? A slut. Doesn't seem too open and non judgemental does it?

    On the other hand, if you took a poll of women in America and asked them if they would prefer to marry a guy with more than fifty partners, I'm guessing the results would be lower than Bush's approval numbers. Getting called a stud might work well with "the boys", but generally isn't looked upon so kindly by women as it tends to have a connotation of someone who uses people.

    Honestly I don't believe the numbers would be that low, ignoring the fact outside of bravado there is a limited possibility of a male ever hitting 50 partners during normal sexual relations in a life time, let alone marrying age.

    I bet if you asked women and men "Would you marry a partner who had slept with 10 people previous to your relationship?" Women would answer in the affirmative more then men by a considerable margin.

    I really doubt that. Especially if you phrase the question that way. Outside of any context, the idea of someone who has had a lot of sexual partners is going to raise brows, no matter the gender. I mean, if the only thing I know about this hypothetical person is that he's extremely promiscuous, I wouldn't want to marry this hypothetical person.

    Ok lets say 10 people prior to your hypothetical relationship at age 25. Doesn't seem like that big of a number to me. College one night stands, bad dates etc. I'd say 10 by 25 would seem decidedly low, though by that age I had 1 maybe 1/2 so its hypothetical for me.

    Preacher on
    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    IreneDAdlerIreneDAdler Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    As for the stud vs. manwhore thing, I probably just move amongst very liberal circles (academia tends to be like that), but I've never heard sexual promiscuity in men being held in a positive light. If the word "stud" is ever used, it's usually not in the context of sexual activity, and if it is, it's generally in a sarcastic manner.

    IreneDAdler on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    HakkekageHakkekage Space Whore Academy summa cum laudeRegistered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    redx wrote: »
    isn't manwhore the common term these days anyway? I mean, I wasn't in a frat, so it's been a while since I've heard anyone be called a stud.

    Player maybe, but that kinda does have negative connotations to it.

    Stud? really? I swear to god at one point I was hip.

    Not as a negative. Look at TV, Movies, magazines. Men are the sexual predators and females their sheep. Very rarely is a positive female sexual role model ever shown. If a woman likes sex shes some kind of psycho, has a mental disorder, or shes a ball buster. Hell they'll compare a woman to a male and try and make it seem like its a negative comparison.


    That's why I was a little uncomfortable with Knocked Up, even though it was funny. The girl was just kind of...blank, and we were obviously supposed to sympathize with the guy more because lol angry preggers woman.

    Hakkekage on
    3DS: 2165 - 6538 - 3417
    NNID: Hakkekage
  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Plutocracy wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    redx wrote: »
    isn't manwhore the common term these days anyway? I mean, I wasn't in a frat, so it's been a while since I've heard anyone be called a stud.

    Player maybe, but that kinda does have negative connotations to it.

    Stud? really? I swear to god at one point I was hip.

    Not as a negative. Look at TV, Movies, magazines. Men are the sexual predators and females their sheep. Very rarely is a positive female sexual role model ever shown. If a woman likes sex shes some kind of psycho, has a mental disorder, or shes a ball buster. Hell they'll compare a woman to a male and try and make it seem like its a negative comparison.

    I don't recall the Sex in the City characters being given those negative associations, although you can still argue that the fact that it's so popular is purely because it displays promiscuity from a female perspective in relatively liberal way.

    On the show nope, but listen to any critique of the show from males, a lot of them will say the characters are shallow, non believeable, etc etc. Honestly, just like in America we like to pretend we aren't racists, we like to pretend we aren't sexists as well.

    Preacher on
    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    SenshiSenshi BALLING OUT OF CONTROL WavefrontRegistered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Hakkekage wrote: »
    That's why I was a little uncomfortable with Knocked Up, even though it was funny. The girl was just kind of...blank, and we were obviously supposed to sympathize with the guy more because lol angry preggers woman.
    Did you see Juno? That was a very good movie in terms of "yeah sex is okay as long as you're mature enough to handle it" which both Juno and Bleek turned out to be.

    Senshi on
  • Options
    HakkekageHakkekage Space Whore Academy summa cum laudeRegistered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Trowizilla wrote: »

    From my own (ahem) research, it's just as hard to get a man off as it is to get a woman off. We're not born with blowjob instructions, you know. Men are, however, more encouraged to explore their own bodies, and thus are likelier to be able to get themselves off during sex.

    I don't know, I don't exactly have experience, but it just seems from a purely practical view that it's easier for guys because they have a big whacking thing right there that's hard to miss, whereas for girls it takes a bit more finesse.

    [tiny]This is part of the reason why I have never been able to get myself off, I think.[/tiny]

    Hakkekage on
    3DS: 2165 - 6538 - 3417
    NNID: Hakkekage
  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    As for the stud vs. manwhore thing, I probably just move amongst very liberal circles (academia tends to be like that), but I've never heard sexual promiscuity in men being held in a positive light. If the word "stud" is ever used, it's usually not in the context of sexual activity, and if it is, it's generally in a sarcastic manner.

    Its also who you hang out with. You are in academia, and probably not with a lot of males who have sex anyways (didn't you mention your science lab is full of some hard up dudes?) It's like on this board, you'll find more enlightened views of sexual relations but this is an ideal place. Out there in the world there are more guys trying to emulate Wedding Crashers then The Story of Us (sorry I couldn't think of a recent movie that had a healthy male/female relationship).

    Preacher on
    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    IreneDAdlerIreneDAdler Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Trowizilla wrote: »
    Plutocracy wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »

    Honestly I don't believe the numbers would be that low, ignoring the fact outside of bravado there is a limited possibility of a male ever hitting 50 partners during normal sexual relations in a life time, let alone marrying age.

    I bet if you asked women and men "Would you marry a partner who had slept with 10 people previous to your relationship?" Women would answer in the affirmative more then men by a considerable margin.

    Couldn't that be attributed to the fact that for a woman to truly enjoy sexual intercourse she needs a guy who knows what he's doing while men can reach orgasm more easily?

    From my own (ahem) research, it's just as hard to get a man off as it is to get a woman off. We're not born with blowjob instructions, you know. Men are, however, more encouraged to explore their own bodies, and thus are likelier to be able to get themselves off during sex.

    I dunno, are you talking about oral, anal, or vaginal sex? And of course, not counting things that don't directly stimulate the genitals, like, I dunno, dripping hot wax on your partner's back and whatnot. Oral sex, I would agree with you. Anal/vaginal sex, I'm not so sure.

    IreneDAdler on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    HakkekageHakkekage Space Whore Academy summa cum laudeRegistered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Senshi wrote: »
    Hakkekage wrote: »
    That's why I was a little uncomfortable with Knocked Up, even though it was funny. The girl was just kind of...blank, and we were obviously supposed to sympathize with the guy more because lol angry preggers woman.
    Did you see Juno? That was a very good movie in terms of "yeah sex is okay as long as you're mature enough to handle it" which both Juno and Bleek turned out to be.

    Yeah, I love Juno. It really is a good film and I wish more people could be shown it as an example of such to debunk our stupid abstinent only sections society.

    Hakkekage on
    3DS: 2165 - 6538 - 3417
    NNID: Hakkekage
  • Options
    Double_FacesDouble_Faces Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Alrighty, it's about time I got back on here and clarified some Shiot.

    I never, ever use "virginity" as a pre-requisite for dating. Ever. Period. I do not go "a-hunting"

    Second, I don't see what is strange about not liking the idea that a woman I love being with someone else. This is not the case with ex-girlfriends. For example, my last ex is getting married. The thought of her having sex with someone doesn't bother me, but it WOULD HAVE if she was still with me. I fail to see the strangeness.

    It WOULD be hypocritical to say, "No girl can have previous partners" while I had previous partners. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that while I have had previous partners, I don't like to think of her older lovers. I would hope she is the same way.

    Do I claim her? Never. Do I control her? No. Do I track down virgins? Nope.

    Do I not like the idea of the woman I love being with another man? Nope. Does it make me uncomfortable? Yes. Very. But I don't ever say anything because it's in the past, out of my control. I don't want to hear her talk about past experiences with people, and she doesn't want to hear mine.


    I DO however, chop women into meat. They are the inferior species after all.

    Double_Faces on
    SSBB Code: 0258 9993 5495
  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    I can manually stimulate myself to orgasm pretty easily, but an orgasm during intercourse is easier for my fiancee then for me, though I don't believe I am a normal person for that so there is that.

    Preacher on
    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    PlutocracyPlutocracy regular
    edited June 2008
    Preacher wrote: »

    On the show nope, but listen to any critique of the show from males, a lot of them will say the characters are shallow, non believeable, etc etc. Honestly, just like in America we like to pretend we aren't racists, we like to pretend we aren't sexists as well.

    From a critical perspective I would say they are shallow characters because we're meant to empathise with them purely because they have lots of sex, wear fashionable garments and generally live the New York liberal cliché. I wouldn't empathise with a male character purely because he had a lot of sex.

    Plutocracy on
    They fuck you up, your mum and dad.
    They may not mean to, but they do.
    They fill you with the faults they had
    And add some extra, just for you.
  • Options
    SkutSkutSkutSkut Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    My first girlfriend said "Oh goodie a virgin! I get to break you in!"

    and boy did she
    :winky:

    I'm for people scrumping like rabbits, only way to get experience is practice :winky:

    Can't go out and slay the evil Clytor and gain 500 SEXP in the real world.

    SkutSkut on
  • Options
    IreneDAdlerIreneDAdler Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    As for the stud vs. manwhore thing, I probably just move amongst very liberal circles (academia tends to be like that), but I've never heard sexual promiscuity in men being held in a positive light. If the word "stud" is ever used, it's usually not in the context of sexual activity, and if it is, it's generally in a sarcastic manner.

    Its also who you hang out with. You are in academia, and probably not with a lot of males who have sex anyways (didn't you mention your science lab is full of some hard up dudes?) It's like on this board, you'll find more enlightened views of sexual relations but this is an ideal place. Out there in the world there are more guys trying to emulate Wedding Crashers then The Story of Us (sorry I couldn't think of a recent movie that had a healthy male/female relationship).

    Actually, the moral of Wedding Crashers was "Don't sleep around with random chicks because you will end up living with your mom and crashing funerals to pick up women." It definitely ended on a "married happily ever after" note.

    IreneDAdler on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Alrighty, it's about time I got back on here and clarified some Shiot.

    I never, ever use "virginity" as a pre-requisite for dating. Ever. Period. I do not go "a-hunting"

    Second, I don't see what is strange about not liking the idea that a woman I love being with someone else. This is not the case with ex-girlfriends. For example, my last ex is getting married. The thought of her having sex with someone doesn't bother me, but it WOULD HAVE if she was still with me. I fail to see the strangeness.

    It WOULD be hypocritical to say, "No girl can have previous partners" while I had previous partners. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that while I have had previous partners, I don't like to think of her older lovers. I would hope she is the same way.

    Do I claim her? Never. Do I control her? No. Do I track down virgins? Nope.

    Do I not like the idea of the woman I love being with another man? Nope. Does it make me uncomfortable? Yes. Very. But I don't ever say anything because it's in the past, out of my control. I don't want to hear her talk about past experiences with people, and she doesn't want to hear mine.


    I DO however, chop women into meat. They are the inferior species after all.

    And why is it a problem to discuss previous sexual relations? Whats the harm? I've mentioned all my shitty ones to my current fiancee who was a virgin when we started dating. If anything to tell her about the things I enjoyed and the things I didn't enjoy.

    I really fail to see why it would make you uncomfortable to think of your partner with someone else previously. Are you afraid you won't match up?

    Preacher on
    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    HakkekageHakkekage Space Whore Academy summa cum laudeRegistered User regular
    edited June 2008
    SkutSkut wrote: »
    My first girlfriend said "Oh goodie a virgin! I get to break you in!"

    and boy did she
    :winky:

    I'm for people scrumping like rabbits, only way to get experience is practice :winky:

    Can't go out and slay the evil Clytor and gain 500 SEXP in the real world.

    They lied to me?

    Hakkekage on
    3DS: 2165 - 6538 - 3417
    NNID: Hakkekage
  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    As for the stud vs. manwhore thing, I probably just move amongst very liberal circles (academia tends to be like that), but I've never heard sexual promiscuity in men being held in a positive light. If the word "stud" is ever used, it's usually not in the context of sexual activity, and if it is, it's generally in a sarcastic manner.

    Its also who you hang out with. You are in academia, and probably not with a lot of males who have sex anyways (didn't you mention your science lab is full of some hard up dudes?) It's like on this board, you'll find more enlightened views of sexual relations but this is an ideal place. Out there in the world there are more guys trying to emulate Wedding Crashers then The Story of Us (sorry I couldn't think of a recent movie that had a healthy male/female relationship).

    Actually, the moral of Wedding Crashers was "Don't sleep around with random chicks because you will end up living with your mom and crashing funerals to pick up women." It definitely ended on a "married happily ever after" note.

    Yeah after they screwed a bunch of people...

    Preacher on
    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    SkutSkutSkutSkut Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Hakkekage wrote: »
    SkutSkut wrote: »
    My first girlfriend said "Oh goodie a virgin! I get to break you in!"

    and boy did she
    :winky:

    I'm for people scrumping like rabbits, only way to get experience is practice :winky:

    Can't go out and slay the evil Clytor and gain 500 SEXP in the real world.

    They lied to me?

    I'm afraid so. :(

    SkutSkut on
  • Options
    Double_FacesDouble_Faces Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    Alrighty, it's about time I got back on here and clarified some Shiot.

    I never, ever use "virginity" as a pre-requisite for dating. Ever. Period. I do not go "a-hunting"

    Second, I don't see what is strange about not liking the idea that a woman I love being with someone else. This is not the case with ex-girlfriends. For example, my last ex is getting married. The thought of her having sex with someone doesn't bother me, but it WOULD HAVE if she was still with me. I fail to see the strangeness.

    It WOULD be hypocritical to say, "No girl can have previous partners" while I had previous partners. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that while I have had previous partners, I don't like to think of her older lovers. I would hope she is the same way.

    Do I claim her? Never. Do I control her? No. Do I track down virgins? Nope.

    Do I not like the idea of the woman I love being with another man? Nope. Does it make me uncomfortable? Yes. Very. But I don't ever say anything because it's in the past, out of my control. I don't want to hear her talk about past experiences with people, and she doesn't want to hear mine.


    I DO however, chop women into meat. They are the inferior species after all.

    And why is it a problem to discuss previous sexual relations? Whats the harm? I've mentioned all my shitty ones to my current fiancee who was a virgin when we started dating. If anything to tell her about the things I enjoyed and the things I didn't enjoy.

    I really fail to see why it would make you uncomfortable to think of your partner with someone else previously. Are you afraid you won't match up?

    Not at all. I view as what I have with a woman as unique and love filled, especially the act of sex. I don't want to hear about that same idea with another man. I also think it's somewhat rude. But that is a separate argument.

    Double_Faces on
    SSBB Code: 0258 9993 5495
  • Options
    SkutSkutSkutSkut Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    How is it rude? Do you think masturbation is rude too? She's not doing that with you either.

    SkutSkut on
  • Options
    nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    As for the stud vs. manwhore thing, I probably just move amongst very liberal circles (academia tends to be like that), but I've never heard sexual promiscuity in men being held in a positive light. If the word "stud" is ever used, it's usually not in the context of sexual activity, and if it is, it's generally in a sarcastic manner.

    Its also who you hang out with. You are in academia, and probably not with a lot of males who have sex anyways (didn't you mention your science lab is full of some hard up dudes?) It's like on this board, you'll find more enlightened views of sexual relations but this is an ideal place. Out there in the world there are more guys trying to emulate Wedding Crashers then The Story of Us (sorry I couldn't think of a recent movie that had a healthy male/female relationship).

    Actually, the moral of Wedding Crashers was "Don't sleep around with random chicks because you will end up living with your mom and crashing funerals to pick up women." It definitely ended on a "married happily ever after" note.

    Most sex comedy puss out after at the end

    nexuscrawler on
  • Options
    Double_FacesDouble_Faces Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    "Hey babe, lemme tell you about all the chicks I've boned and details about what I've done to them".


    Is rude.

    I meant it is rude to talk about past relationships with the current partner. THough at a certain point intimacy over rules manners.

    Double_Faces on
    SSBB Code: 0258 9993 5495
  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Not at all. I view as what I have with a woman as unique and love filled, especially the act of sex. I don't want to hear about that same idea with another man. I also think it's somewhat rude. But that is a separate argument.

    Do you think the same thing of the relationship in general? I mean if she had a previous bad experience with someone who wasn't open emotionally, and you weren't being open emotionally should she not bring it up?

    I don't want to go after you, but you are presenting an argument here I just can't grasp. Human being learn from previous experiences not shun them. It's how we grow.

    Preacher on
    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    Double_FacesDouble_Faces Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Yes, of course it is. And I would hope she does bring it up.

    However there is a difference between saying, "My last boyfriend wasn't open emotionally" and saying "There was this kinky as shit thing that Danny used to do when he got drunk and fucked me."

    Double_Faces on
    SSBB Code: 0258 9993 5495
  • Options
    redxredx I(x)=2(x)+1 whole numbersRegistered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    redx wrote: »
    isn't manwhore the common term these days anyway? I mean, I wasn't in a frat, so it's been a while since I've heard anyone be called a stud.

    Player maybe, but that kinda does have negative connotations to it.

    Stud? really? I swear to god at one point I was hip.

    Not as a negative. Look at TV, Movies, magazines. Men are the sexual predators and females their sheep. Very rarely is a positive female sexual role model ever shown. If a woman likes sex shes some kind of psycho, has a mental disorder, or shes a ball buster. Hell they'll compare a woman to a male and try and make it seem like its a negative comparison.

    except for, you know, sex in the city and desperate housewives, and a whole slew of other recent shows and films involving women, who have sex, enjoy it, and don't have to make it the focus of a whole show.

    I read the new yorker, the atlantic and the economist, watch less then 6 hour of american tv a week, and only see movies I want to see. There is selection bias, but was mainly joking at the the fact the things seem to have gotten better since the 80s and early 90s.

    I don't really know how the whole FHM, Stuff, Maxim whatever play into it magazine wise, if that is what you are talking about. Guys like looking at mostly naked women, it's not intrinicly unhealthy. If they want to look at mostly naked men, and read about stuff they are interested in, I suppose there there's men's health, red book and scotch-tape.

    I wouldn't argue that there is still disparity I guess, but... you know... free market and all that. People buy all that bullshit by the checkout lane and the folks writing it don't really care much about anything other then selling copy. If there was demand, I think they'd meet it. I do find it kinda distressing comparing some statistics I've heard and the fact I've never seen "6 Sex Tips to Help You Actually Get Off For a Change."

    redx on
    They moistly come out at night, moistly.
  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Yes, of course it is. And I would hope she does bring it up.

    However there is a difference between saying, "My last boyfriend wasn't open emotionally" and saying "There was this kinky as shit thing that Danny used to do when he got drunk and fucked me."

    But why is that? Why can't she tell you something she enjoyed previously? It's not like she's going to be "Damn man why don't you be more like when brett and mike tag teamed me and get deep in bitch"

    Preacher on
    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    Double_FacesDouble_Faces Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    Yes, of course it is. And I would hope she does bring it up.

    However there is a difference between saying, "My last boyfriend wasn't open emotionally" and saying "There was this kinky as shit thing that Danny used to do when he got drunk and fucked me."

    But why is that? Why can't she tell you something she enjoyed previously? It's not like she's going to be "Damn man why don't you be more like when brett and mike tag teamed me and get deep in bitch"

    Because she can tell me what she likes without telling me who did it.

    You're right, starting tomorrow I'm gonna change my ways ask her for gory gory details about past fuck friends.

    "I want names honey. Let me know who got janzy on your downtown bonanza"

    Double_Faces on
    SSBB Code: 0258 9993 5495
  • Options
    PlutocracyPlutocracy regular
    edited June 2008
    Redx I brought up Sex and The City on the last page. The below got Bottom page'd.
    Plutocracy wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »

    On the show nope, but listen to any critique of the show from males, a lot of them will say the characters are shallow, non believeable, etc etc. Honestly, just like in America we like to pretend we aren't racists, we like to pretend we aren't sexists as well.

    From a critical perspective I would say they are shallow characters because we're meant to empathise with them purely because they have lots of sex, wear fashionable garments and generally live the New York liberal cliché. I wouldn't empathise with a male character purely because he had a lot of sex.

    Plutocracy on
    They fuck you up, your mum and dad.
    They may not mean to, but they do.
    They fill you with the faults they had
    And add some extra, just for you.
This discussion has been closed.