There is no ‘sexual double standard’ as sex is biologically, physically and most times, emotionally different for men and women. Men need sexual release. The whole ‘blue balls’ thing is very true, and sometimes, masturbation just will not do it. Women have nothing to keep in check, no good reason to have pointless pleasure sex. Women are penetrated, the submissive, the bottom, the uke, the receiver. Men are the penetrators, the dominators, the seme, the takers. Unless it is rape, a woman cannot ‘fuck’ or ‘dominate’ a man
Heterosexually/dildo non-virgin females are the biggest hypocrite on the planet anyway. They came to feminists, but are slaves to primitive urges and service men, they claim disgust at other people's sexual activities, but touched and let a guy stick his penis inside them/violated themselves. They claim a man 'cheated' on them, when they let another men put his penis inside them, and that man had the kindness to forgive her. And it goes on.
I am not a masochist. I do not take pleasure in anyone suffering. I would not give to charity and enjoy helping others if I did not. I would not be polite, were I so. I am perfectly progressive, as you would see if you bothered to read my later comments. I am fighting for men's rights too, like a feminist; I know that, nowadays, men are far more oppressed than women. I am stating biological facts. I formed my view through my education in reproduction classes (we do have ‘sex ed’ over here, we look at intelligently, in the biological manner, though we still learn about STDs, transgenderism and whatnot). I have known about sex and reproduction for fourteen, almost fifteen, years. as I, unlike most ‘feminists’ (once again I must say this), as I do not scream about how supporting abortion is ‘anti-women’ while turning around and saying men, even the fathers, do not deserve opinions on the life of their own child. No one cares about them having mental breakdowns. Everyone only cares about the selfish bitch who decided to get fucked and doesn’t to be responsible for the life she once were. I do not shame men’s sexuality. I do not think a man is ‘objectifying’ women by looking at them sexually, or enjoying porn, or that it is wrong for them to look a woman sexuality when she is wearing clothing meant to display the body in a sexual manner’, while they weakly fawn over men’s muscles and butts. Female who let men fuck them (as in ‘for pleasure’) are not feminists. They can do that all they like, granted, but they are hypocrites and liars to claim they are feminists when they have objectified themselves. They are anything but ‘liberated’. I am truly liberated, as I am free from slavery to lust and letting men rule me. How the hell can a woman be a ‘feminist’ or ‘liberated’ by letting men trust into her most intimate areas, taking her as a receptacle (however, again, unlike most ‘feminists’ I see nothing wrong with a man who does that, or virgin/asexual men).
Saying there is a ‘double standard’ is like saying men having penises and testicles,and women having vaginas and wombs, is ‘sexist’ or a ‘double standard’. Further biology that shows that women are not meant to be promiscuous is that they can only be pregnant by one man at a time. Not to mention, the initiate to seek out a mate with the best genes for their children, hence why most women have a lower sex drive.
Funny, your Grandmother will have most likely been a Second-Wave Feminist, not this bullshit ‘third wave’ (AKA Feminazaism, where all women are perfect angels free of judgement for their choices, or you are a misogynistic pig, but they can say what they like about men).
Finally, I am not playing Devil’s Abdicate. I am simply stating my views as I am free to do in a world of equality.
I see, I support men's rights as well, and i did read all your comments, dear
Let's make an analysis, on the theory that men are more oppressed than women nowadays
Points in your favor are that men receive higher punishments than women for the same crimes and ways they have done them, men have to be within a military selective service system (as in the US) or doing mandatory military service while women do not (With some exceptions like Israel, Brunei, etc.), and when it comes to divorce, the custody of children will go more to women than men.
As a man, I feel that men suffer from socially imposed definitions of masculinity that does not recognize the real and unique nature of male individuals. Stereotypes include for men to be sexually virile, aggressive, overtly-competitive, and tough at the face of life and taking the initiative in many aspects, from politics to the starting of sexual relations
The pitfall of your theory is that women continue to suffer under the clutches of patriarchal values (this is a fact in developing countries), Gender equality is of vital importance for these countries as such archaic ideals of gender are damaging the fair, egalitarian, and stable progress. There are two points for gender equality: The first is to acknowledge the physical difference women and men have between each other (men have a penis and women have a vagina) as this is a real fact, unless nature surprise us. another physical difference is when we describe strength levels (men being stronger due to their their more developed muscles, women being more flexible due to their more developed ligaments) where both are powerful on their own right, none overpowering the other. The second is to acknowledge that there are many practices that damage men and women by their society as they define their sexuality and gender roles (men are the perverts and the leaders while women being the virgins and followers). this is where the real problem lies. Coming back to the issues in developed countries like the UK and US, women's rights have improved, therefore feeling a sense of accomplishment for having a gender-equal society. That is a lie
When it comes to gender ideals, there are still problems. Men are still socially-required to be tough and virile while women to be kind and protective to their sexual integrity. in the case of gender roles, women are still expected to take care of the home and be in charge of the well-being of her family while men are the ones who have to provide to demonstrate their masculinity. that is not fair for any of them. the women cannot be a professional and an individual if she is given the house chores monopoly. For men, the disadvantage is to not be part of the real development of his family, to be supportive and fair.
I study women who draw women in sensual ways, I am so glad these women are against archaic values that say women are not supposed to like sex or sexual media, or another idea would be to be virgins unlit marriage. these women demonstrate that women can be great admirers of the female sexual form. Based on Nielsen, 1/3 of internet porn watchers are women in the US, is that a bad thing, nope, instead, it is positive as former monolith worlds are becoming more open and more inclusive to new audiences and new actors within them. Gender equality happens when men and women share the same or al least almost the same responsibilities of the home and their development and action in the workforce. it is true there will never be 50/50 of everything, but aiming for more fairness an integration is key for our social progress.
Now, when it comes to the issue of abortion, I believe the decision must go only with the mother if her health is in jeopardy (due to health conditions, violence, incest, and rape). if none of those problems are present, then the decision is for both as it took two to tango. Now, if the girl is a "Selfish bitch", then the guy is either a victim of violation (they exists) or just a dumbass who did not know how to protect himself if the sex was consensual. there are motherfucking men and women out there as well as male and female victims of their plots, this is due to their failure of learning values, no of the nonsense of religion, but values that teach us how to treat each other fairly and respect each other. As of now, that is not a reality yet, but working for it is worth all the wait it needs.
There are selfish women out there but try to see the whole picture, our generation is in a difficult situation, we need to redefine ourselves from horrible terms such as being Materialistic and narcissistic. we need to recognize that we are a mosaic, oven to change its forms in order to create a better artwork.
You have key points, but look at the whole picture, limited views will make you look bad rather than a person who analyses her world
It is never my fashion to insult people, I am reminding you to look at the whole picture, understand the whole possibilities, and to observe the both sides of the story
I apologize in advance for the length of the this post.
Ah, ok.
Ok, that is good to read. I agree with and understand those points. The attitudes in regards to masculinity piss me off as much as what is contained in the next paragraph. My boyfriend suffered that quite a bit recently. You know, the typical ‘tiny penis’, ‘only in it because you want sex’, ‘doormat’, ‘faggot’, ‘bitch’, etc. Not to mention, if a woman (such as myself), like feminine men/can’t stand macho/overly muscular men (mainly because I don’t want it look like he is with because I weakly want ‘protection’ or ‘saving’), she is seen as wanting to walk all over him. If the woman is in charge in the relationship (though I do not believe anyone should be ‘in charge’), he is called ‘whipped’, ‘pussy’ (God, I hate that word, especially when it is aimed at men), and ‘mangina’. There is also the excuses for female-on-male, male-on-male, and, just to cover all of them, female-on-female abuse and rape. I know it is an in intelligent thing, to use TV Tropes, but there is also The Unfair Sex, Bumbling Dad, the shaming of a Distressed Dude, and a few others I cannot recall. However, that is an area in which women suffer just as much. Men are also ignored in regard to eating disorders and in medical health in general (well, in America, in regards to the latter)
Urgh, not the rubbish ‘Teh patriarchy still exists!” rubbish. However, you are right, as it is a bad hard to repute such eloquent language. However, the only areas I can think of where women are oppressed or discriminated is in male-dominated fields, (though the reserve is true as well, of course, particularly in regards to children and intimate examination, where men are forced to have a chaperone, not when the genders are reversed). Along with this (much as Iam anti-war/anti-military) military service, in that women are forced to be in the background, behind a desk, as a medic, or using aircraft or sniper rifles, and are completely disallowed from fighting on the front line, so they are not fighting in the first place. Even more well-known, there is the countries where they are prohibited from driving, getting an education, or even voting. Finally, we have the video game industry (though that can be added to the media aspect, and men are just as stereotyped), both within games and in the attitudes and mistreatment of women employed there, along with gamers who happen to be female (I dislike the term ‘girl gamer’). Hm, I didn’t know about the looser ligaments thing. I can’t even touch my toes standing up. I guess it makes sense, though, when you consider childbirth. However, everyone can train to be stronger or more flexible, remember. I myself wish I had more muscle structure.
Again, very true, very true. I notice it most in the American media. Feminine men don’t get stereotyped as gay or wimpy as much over here. Indeed. That is I believe, regards of the genders of the people in the relationship, things such as child-rearing, housework and cooking should be shared. For example, due to my OCD, I am good at tidying and cleaning, though I do not consider it stereotypical. However, I am, well, useless in the kitchen. I can chop food, but that’s it. Mainly because I find cooking to confusing and stressful (I get too worried about being scalded or it burning). The thing about sexual virility baffles me. So, he hasn’t put his penis in some girl’s vagina? And? So? It is bad not only because it pressures men, but has also caused the attitudes that men cannot be raped, sexually harassed, or assaulted, particularly by a woman. I used to think so too (but not because of the ‘men always want sex’ thing, but rather, again, because of the biology difference between men and women), until I just realised, frankly out of nowhere, how anti-Feminist that was. It is because of my father’s treatment of my mother that I fight for male victims of abuse as well, as I said to myself “Well, what if it was your mum who was doing that? Would you say your dad deserved it?”. However, I do not tend to say this, as people tend assume, and refuse to believe otherwise, that that is where I obtained my attitudes in regards to sex. It is either that, or religion, or me being molested/raped, when nothing of the sort has happened (to think so is insulting to real victims of these heinous acts). It is also, like other things, the opposite to the ancient past. Men who slept around or had too much sex were seen as insulting their virility, particularly in Greece, and it was thought that woman could not say no to sex.
There is nothing wrong with that attitude in regard to female sexuality however (well, female heterosexuality). A woman is ‘interested in sex’ with a man wants nothing more than to be dominated, again, due to the simple biology of it and the penetrator-penetrated relationship. The attitude of virginity to marriage is understandable too, for the reasons I have previously mentioned, and that no self-respecting man or woman would want to marry a woman who has already been disloyal to him or her. Once again, you are correct there. There is nothing more I can say really.
Ok, again, I agree for the most part, but if the woman knew her health might endanger her if she became pregnant, the logical choice is to not have sex, and not take on the possibility of it occurring. For example, yes, I am not interested in sex in the slightest, but I also do not think this tiny body, with its conditions, could cope with pregnancy. I fear for a repeat of my own turbulent birth and aftermath and my mother was perfectly healthy. It is not the man’s fault. It is the woman who let him inside her without ‘protection’ (that is another thing that sickens me, that we must ‘protect’ from, or that sex is ‘safe’ when the natural occurrence, which I know does not happen every time, is being activity prevented). Or it is both. However, if a woman is willing to have a man thrust inside her, then she is perfectly capable of handling pregnancy, which does not involve one being as vulnerable, as open and exposed. However, I am glad that you agree men should have as much say. However, those people that call that tiny life a ‘clump of cells’ a ‘parasite’ (even though the definition of parasite states that it is a being of another species and technically, we are all parasites, as we require other living things for substance), a ‘mistake’. That is the biggest form of hypocrisy one can do. We were all those ‘clumps of cells’ once. Sperm and eggs are living things, cells are living things, so foetuses are living things. It makes simply existing a punishable offence, just because it is ‘inconvenient’. It insults that person, their mother, their father, and the whole of humanity. And what does it say about the ‘kept’ children? I’m sure they will enjoy the lovely story of how they selfishly murdered their older brother(s)/sister(s). If a person falls for someone’s ‘ploy’ for sex, they have no reason to complain, for they were stupid enough to fall for it. It is not ‘victim-blaming’ it is called taking responsibility, and a little intelligence. And if they were a (heterosexual female) non-virgin before it happened, that becomes even less, as she is already been penetrated, so another penis or object makes no difference. As for respect, again, indeed. I am a very cynical person, but I still believe in the goodness and decency of people. I’ve seen and read the wonderful things we can do, and I’m certain, I hope, that is greater than the horrid things we do. Sadly, such attitudes as racism, homophobia, transphobia, etc will never cease, as there will always be one intolerant who will past it down to either their children or someone else’s, and those children will continue the chain. However, we can still reduce it as much as possible, as well, our world has changed so much.
"The attitude of virginity to marriage is understandable too, for the reasons I have previously mentioned, and that no self-respecting man or woman would want to marry a woman who has already been disloyal to him or her".
If no self-respecting men and women should marry a non-virgin woman, then I guess you will not have any problems when it comes for self-respecting women to not marry non-virgin men, right?
The concept of virginity is as fictitious as Aesop fables, society constructed this idea in order to limit women's choices and liberties, whereas men did not have such a value and could do whatever they wanted sexually. I know there are physical comparisons when it comes to virginity, such as the penetration of the Hymen. But since when a membrane became the epicenter for a moral-ethical issue that endured for so many centuries? why did we put so much importance on something so common when it comes to define the "sexual Validity" of women.
I am sure you will not agree with this idea, and I respect if some women wish to be virgins until marriage, but it will be unethical of me to support a system where inequalities get in the way. Either both men and women stay "pure" before marriage, or none
the next excerpt
"If a person falls for someone’s ‘ploy’ for sex, they have no reason to complain, for they were stupid enough to fall for it. It is not ‘victim-blaming’ it is called taking responsibility, and a little intelligence. And if they were a (heterosexual female) non-virgin before it happened, that becomes even less, as she is already been penetrated, so another penis or object makes no difference".
My dear, rape is rape, there is no excuse or justification for it. Again coming with the issue of virginity, if a "non-virgin" woman was raped, are you suggesting it does not matter? That not only goes against gender equality, that goes against the most basic forms of human rights. Nothing justifies rape, nothing. We need to wake up as a society to understand better the situation, support the victims (whether male or female) and punish the perpetrators (either male or female). I am not talking about feminism, I am talking about basic social justice.
Also I see you are phallocentric in your principles when you describe sexuality, the penetrator-penetrated divide. I am a person who believes that both men and women have wonderful sexualities, none is better that the other. Such a divide does not even go with natural laws. It is proven that many female animals, such as chimps and wolves (my favorite animals) are promiscuous and even practice homosexual relationships. However they end up giving birth to the next generations as both males and females are adapted by evolution to do so. We humans, we set ourselves free from natural social laws since we came down from the branches. Our sexual nature is more evolved and developed than the rest of the animal kingdom combined. why limit our sexual nature to the Penetrator-Penetrated divide?
Women and men are different in their physical sex, but both want to feel their sexualities in ways not limited to its reproductive and limited role. Having a sense of our sexuality is a human right, part of our human nature
For the ‘woman not wanting a non-virgin man’ but, again, I refer you to this:
“There is no ‘sexual double standard’ as sex is biologically, physically and most times, emotionally different for men and women. Men need sexual release. The whole ‘blue balls’ thing is very true, and sometimes, masturbation just will not do it. Women have nothing to keep in check, no good reason to have pointless pleasure sex. Women are penetrated, the submissive, the bottom, the uke, the receiver. Men are the penetrators, the dominators, the seme, the takers. Unless it is rape, a woman cannot ‘fuck’ or ‘dominate’ a man.”
There is no difference between a virgin and non-virgin heterosexual male (that is not to say I consider homosexual non-virgins as lesser), whereas, again, there is a big difference with women (see below)
It is an insult to marriage, a non-virgin woman claiming she is loyal, and then turning around and screaming and beating her husband for ‘cheating’. Again, it is about loyality and commitment. It’s not like I’m the only person who thinks it. And there is nothing wrong with those who do. Freud is overrated and spouted mostly rubbish (I get the feeling you might refer to the ‘Madonna-Whore Complex’ – it is nothing more than a man respecting himself, women, and the concepts of romance and marriage. It is not ‘in equal’, due to, again, the italic statement. Again, that’s not to say that all things of old should stay and be, but this, this is logical. I’m sorry, but I think marriage should be between two people and two people alone (that goes for both heterosexual and homosexual couples). That is not to say non-virgins should be banned from marriage, or that my opinion matters to them, but it is just how I feel, due to how big a commitment it is. Even then, we still have if I remember correctly, about fifty percent of marriages ending in divorce? Most is which isby women It’s just…sad. You go through that ceremony and celebration, only for it you and your spouse to fall apart down the line.
Urgh again. Virginity is real. It has existed since the dawn of humanity, and it always will. Virgin – has not took part in sexual activity. The difference between a virgin and non-virgin woman is that a virgin has not been penetrated, be it by anything. Are you saying there is no difference between woman who is free of sexual slavery and one who is not? It has nothing to do with the hymen, I understand. Again, I refer you to the above in italics. What ‘freedoms’ and ‘choices’? The freedom to be fucked by every man she fancies? The ‘freedom’ to be a slave to sex? At least, in lesbian/gay male intercourse, things are rather more equal due to both participants being the same gender. They are free to have sex with men as much as they like, they just cannot claim to be feminists. It’s not just I’d try to someone making that choice. It’s not for me to do, and it would be a waste of my time. However, there is nothing ‘oppressive’ or ‘sexist’ or ‘misogynistic’ about having an opinon onone’s choice. If someone were to insult me for my choices, that’s their choice, and yes, I might be offended, but they still have the right to do so. There is even disgusting people who think ‘slut’ is ‘the word in the English language and calling a woman a ‘slut’ is ‘the worst thing you can do to a woman’. Really, so the word is worse than Nigger? Faggot? Homophobic and racial slurs? Words that demean and insult the disabled? And using the word slut against a woman is worse than rape or abuse? Speaking of which, I’ve said before, saying you can rape a (willing) non-virgin female is liken saying you are eating the same meal if you vomit it up and eat the vomit. It’s a strange analogy, I know, but I don’t know how else to put it. It just comes down to hypocrisy. We are all hypocrites in some matter. The rest, I agree with. The rest, however, I again agree with. However, I must also say, I do think only virgin/lesbian women can be feminists. Mothers are non-virgins, married woman are mostly non-virgins, (sadly) rape victims are technically non-virgin, though not in the mental sense, as they did not consent, if you get what I mean. It would be cruel to say they are. Yes, it is phallocentric, but only because, well, heterosexual intercourse is phallocentric. It’s not a bad thing. It’s just the what it works.
In regards to chimps, I know that, but the difference is our greater development. We have the intelligence to stick with one mate if we want, something few animal species do. Yes, animals do have some form of romance in their mating rituals, but again, most go their separate ways after the…main action. The bit about homosexuality is good, though. It is one guarantied prove that homosexuality is natural
Everyone is free to explore their sexuality as much as they wish, but also understand that, while no one can stop them doing what they do, as it’s their choice, it will not stop people having an opinon on it.
Not because men have a penis it means they will always dominate, that's justifying their supremacy The main ethical value our world needs to understand is that both genders must not overpower the other Biology is one thing, but you are not getting the emotional/psychological aspect. Women have the right to practice their sexuality just as men do. we are the same species after all, all humans need some form of intimacy. However I respect asexuals if they do not want to do it as that is their choice.
Now, when I mean that women have the right to practice her sexuality, they do it in their own terms, at their own liking
Don't you think that it is unfair for one sex to be sexuality free while the other condemned? In the 1950s I am sure many men would truly agreed with you as their women were put in the kitchen
Virginity is real if you make it real, my problem with virginity is that it is stupidly used as a way to judge and rate women and that has no logical sense.
we as humans have proved we are capable to change and improve technologies and infrastructures, but not our society and our sexuality
Again, if you want to be a gender equalist, you have to understand that no gender cannot overpower the other. Believing that men are the dominators, simply brings the idea that you are a misogynist who believes in the supremacy of men over women. Even if virginity is real, using it to bring worth on women is simply backward, insulting, and truly ignorant
Now in the case of rape, how do you know if these "non-virgins" are willing? I think it is unfair to overlook that situation. Rape is rape by Christ's sake, that is a crime and a human rights violation. Again, you are justifying rape
Let's say a "good, pure, and virgin" girl was raped, she lost her "virginity" by a motherfucker, no longer being a "virgin". Now, based on your reasoning, that is an issue we truly need to fix and bring justice, but justice to whom, the victim who really needs it or because her virginity was stolen? You principle is justifying that women can become worthless beings while the perpetrators cannot be morally condemned.
The real sadness comes from the fact that the victim suffered a heinous crime, and as a society we have the responsibility to address and fix the problem.
No. I don’t think men are supreme in any area, bar heterosexual intercourse. In there, they are the kings and women the servants. Again, unless it manipulation, assault or rape. Even when a woman ‘makes the first move’, she is just being even more submissive, presenting her body without him even having to ask. Even when she is ‘on top’ she is just doing all the work while he lays back and enjoys it (and I’m not the only one to think that). That is another reason why promiscuous woman are justifiably shamed: they can get sex far easier than men. Even when a man approaches a frigging prostitute, I would bet they would act all high and haughty, like they have something to preserve. Peh. I did not think any gender should be ‘supreme’ anyway, or in anything. Yes, as you said, we will never reach a solid fifty-fifty in any form of employment, or actives, but again, we and only hope and encourage. Here we go. ‘Intimacy’ does not equal sex. You can have a perfectly romantic relationship without out, which you to seem to know from the asexual comment. Casual sex is not very ‘intimate’ or loving, is it?
Again, yes, they should, but should understand that just like they are so quick to judge men, they will be judged as well. Everyone judges and everyone is judged. I know I’m not some innocent, perfect little angel.
Virginity is real because it exists. There is a physical difference between a woman who has had a dildo or penis up there/fingered/been fingered and one who hasn’t. I’ m sure there are mental changes in men, as, again, the physical difference is next to non-existent. And there is nothing wrong with that. Sex is a big change in life and it is treated so nonchalantly nowadays. It used to be such a commitment.
Yes, it is sad.
See above, please.
They are non-virgins. For them to say they are ‘unwilling’ is them being hypocritical. They have already been penetrated. You can’t pick and choose what parts of sex you want and what you don’t (like pregnancy, for example), the whole ‘having boundries’ bullshit. There is no ‘boundaries’ if you are willing to do that. You’re either a sexual woman, and therefore open to all sexual things, since you are will to be so open and exposed, or you are not. The only in-between is if you did to get pregnant. The fact that she suffered a heinous crime, obviously. Some monster took her body and used them, violated them, humiliated and destroyed them mentally.
"They are non-virgins. For them to say they are ‘unwilling’ is them being hypocritical. They have already been penetrated. You can’t pick and choose what parts of sex you want and what you don’t (like pregnancy, for example), the whole ‘having boundries’ bullshit."
I am not sure you understand the difference between consenting sex and rape. Rape is almost inherently physically painful, not even to breach the psychological aspects. When a woman is consenting, she becomes "turned on" and her vagina lubricates itself in preparation for sex. This is what makes foreplay so important. It gives the vagina time to self-lubricate and prevent pain and damage from sex due to the rubbing that comes from having sex.
When a woman is raped, she is almost certainly not "turned on" and the last thing her body is prepared to do is lubricate the vagina. Without the lubrication, sex is incredibly painful for the woman by the rubbing of the condom most rapists wear to prevent DNA evidence. The man will not feel pain, but for the woman it would be almost unbearable, especially as it has been proven that female genitalia has upwards of 8,000 nerves while the male genitalia has roughly 4,000.
So you see, the experiences are completely different! To make an analogy: (Consenting sex) you are in a boxing ring and are punched in the face while wearing a face guard by someone who doesn't want to seriously hurt you and whose fist is covered in a glove. (Rape) You are in the ring without any protective gear, being punched in the face by someone who does want to seriously hurt/kill you whose fist is not in a glove but wearing brass knuckles. It is not the same scenario in the least.
Your comment, using the analogy would go like this: "They are boxers. For them to say they "didn't want to be punched in the face" is them being hypocritical. They were already punched while in the ring (where there is protective gear and medical staff nearby). You can't pick and choose what parts of the sport you want (like the protection) and what you don't (like having your jaw dislocated because you weren't wearing a guard, for example), the whole 'having boundries' bullshit."
In short, rape isn't a horrible crime because of virginity, but because of pain. I'm trying to think of another analogy, but it is still very similar to the boxer one. Let's use this instead: a virgin is shot in the leg in a drive-by. Her non-virgin friend was also shot in the leg. Both are in pain, both could die, both were victims. Is the virgin being shot a greater tragedy than the non-virgin? Is her suffering inherently more agonizing than her friend's?
(I intended this reply to be much shorter, but it was more difficult to explain than I thought.)
It's good to reiterate your points, but you are not giving a breakthrough
"No. I don’t think men are supreme in any area, bar heterosexual intercourse. In there, they are the kings and women the servants."
How can you say that men cannot be supreme in any area, albeit heterosexual sex? that is not coherent, is not that a form of "symbolical slavery" for women?
Let me tell you something, I used to think that, I used to think that men was the giver of pleasure and the main beneficiary while women were there to serve him. However that is not true, women can practice and enjoy their sexuality just as well as men and it does not make them shameful, only archaic and useless ideas (based on bullshit) makes them so.
OK, intimacy does not equal sex, but sex is a form of intimacy as well, it depends on the context and way people understand sex.
Let's say "Virginity" exists, shall the physical side influence the emotional and social sides in order to bring forth the worth of women? the answer will be yes if you are a sex trafficker or a religious fundamentalist. I think it's time for women to focus on more important aspects of their lives rather than centering in protecting something that will not be useful in their lives.
Again and Again, Rape is a crime and a human rights violation, nothing justifies it
Based on your commentary, I see that you support the sexual double standard of the Virgin/Whore. The definition of "willing" in this case is if she desires to have pleasure on her own terms or in an equitable way at least. Not because a women is sexual it will mean she can be treated as an object. Sexuality is an important part of our identity but not the most important one.
Your arguments are quite outdated, I suggest you to look at different perspectives openly and objectively
Sort off, I suppose. Yes, lust is natural, and you can do it all you like, but don’t say, in your servantile data. Yes, I do know that woman feel pleasure too, but that does mean one can go around spreading germs (there have been studies that suggest women carry more germs on their hands, if you don’t consider it starting six years ago being history.
Yes, it does. And nice job trying to oppress my opinion and pigeon-holding me. I am neither. How the fuck is that ‘sex trafficking’ anyway? I wouldn’t within ten feet of a prostitute. However, I still feel for those forced in that industry (and not the ‘I needed the money!’ idiots). Yeah, because you anything negative about women’s choice or you ‘misogynistic’/‘sexist’/‘oppressive’, which they insult men and call them rapists and perverts for having a sex drive. Equality means both positive and negative things.
It will to some people. What about physical and biological difference do you not get? Penis, testicles. Penetrator, needs release. Vagina, submissive, receiver, not needed. Anything but ‘liberating’. I’m not going the repeat the ‘choices’ and ‘judgement’ bit again.
I know that. However, our society being so loose with sex, is why it is assumed if you are in a relationship, even unmarried, you must be fucking. And apparently men cannot be uninterested in sex. My boyfriend get that bullshit recently as well. I wouldn’t even french kiss. We do the non-sexual things of romance. And let's not forget the research on sex and STDs, that wastes money that could be going towards more value things such as medicine and cures. And the waste of resources on sex toys, sex shops, and BDSM stuff.
I’m not ‘justifying’ it. It’s not rape as she had nothing to lose, nothing to take, nothing to violate.
*Sigh*, I already mentioned the bullshit that is the ‘Madonna/Whore Complex”. And most things Freud thought was bullshit. It is nothing more than a man (or woman), respecting themselves, women, and the concepts of romance and marriage. That woman made herself an object already. I am not going to speak out the bullshit that is the ‘double standard’ again. Physical. Differences. Seriously, what is so bloody hard to under?
She is no place to judge another’s sexual needs and wants. They are not ‘women’, they are girls.
However, research on sex and STDs are important as people are directly connected and influenced by these Sexual health is interconnected with many important medical fields of research. Research for medicines and cures have already a considerable support relative to political policies among states.
In the case of rape, the matter should be focused on the behaviors or the perpetrator and victim to better analyses the situation in order to punish the perpetrator and help the victim.
You are still redundant, how can you say you don't believe in the Madonna/Whore Complex if you are supporting sexual double standards?
I acknowledge there are sexual differences, but such differences does not declare anyone the uke and seme. that is a social construction.
When I mention "sex Trafficker" it was because these motherfuckers understand how virginity is important in order to sell these girls at higher prices, which puts these motherfuckers to be the worst types of human beings.
If our societies are becoming sexually more active, that's because people no longer have a biased and narrow-minded definition of sex, gender, and sexuality. Is that bad? If wisely used, it's positive for human progress.
I respect people who want to be and/or are asexual, the thing is we have to acknowledge that we live in a complex world and we truly need to analyze as carefully and unbiased as possible moral and ethical issues.
Ack, sorry about the mistakes in that last message. I forgot to look it over.
It’s your own damn fault if you get an STD, just as it would be your own of you became sick eating rotten food, or rare meat or poisonous berries. Deal with it yourself. That money could also be going towards building homes, both at home and in Third World countries as well. Why, a few people, like dear little Sandra Fluke expected the public to pay for contraception. I may not like him, but Rush Limbaugh was very correct in calling her a slut and a prostitute. Oh, and therein lays another misandric standard: that female-only spaces are ok, especially in gyms in case they are ‘ogled’ and ‘objectified’. Oh, the horror! And would it be ok for a lesbian to ogle you? Those men are usually to busy exercising. And again, women are free to ogle men and it's not misandric or sexist.Take the Coke advert with the guy mowing the lawn, for example, and the Cadbury Crisplo one. One woman said it was saying it is was ok to go after a younger woman, that she is being 'objectified' when the girl was clearly going after her boyfriend's dad. And when I told woman that, she basically said 'a young woman can't rape an older man'. Again, sorry to get off topic, but my mind is like that. However, male-only spaces are ‘PRUF DAT TEH PATRIACHY STIL ECISTS!!!!”. Of course, but we should understand that, while the rape is always the perpetrator’s fault, the victim (male or female) is still putting themselves in a vulnerable position, by getting drunk, not watching their drink for example. I am not ‘blaming the victim’, I am just saying that, in a world of equality, everyone takes responsibility to keep themselves or others safe. However, I do also understand that you can be the most responsible person in the world and still have that happen to you. It just reduces your chance of suffering.
*Facepalm* THERE IS NO BLOODY ‘DOUBLE STANDARD’! Sorry, but you’re still being thick in regards to this.
Where the hell do you think seme and uke came from? It is not this ‘social construction’ rubbish? It physically works that way. Unless it is pegging, it is that way. There is nothing wrong with a man wanting a virgin wife. It is not ‘sexist’, ‘misogynistic’, or ‘oppressive’. As I just said, it about a man respecting himself, woman, and romance/marriage. They want a woman who will with them and them alone. They are not trying to ‘control’ women (they are allowed themselves to be controlled by lust and penis). They want that first time to be not-so-good and clumsy, as I read one man saying. I’m sure no one would bat an eyelid a woman (or a man) wanting a virgin husband.
That’s true. However, for me, rapists, animal/child abusers (which I suppose would in include those) and murderers deserve the death penalty. Too bad it was banned decades ago here
It is not ‘narrow’ to respect oneself and their love life. Yes, it is good that homosexuality, asexuality and transgenderism are gradually being more accepted, such ‘freedom’ has also led to more STDs, more money being wasted, and again, general selfishness. This is a little of topic, but: perhaps we can even more on from men in dresses 'trannies' as well, since no cares with a woman wears a suit and tie. I believe it is ridiculous to gender a piece of fabric for its shape. Beside, this is another thing, along with pink and blue, that was the other way around. I keep wondering who it came to swap.
*Sigh* Again, I agree. I am a very political person after all.
Researching about STDs and and other diseases are as important as building homes, it is through these investigations we are able to prevent, cure/treat, and save so many lives. Without such dedication, our humanity would have never being able to advance and progress. There is no sense of building infrastructures if no one will occupy them due to poor health and bad prevention.
Rush Limbaugh is only correct when it comes to the public paying for contraceptives, but he demonstrates to be a misogynist by judging her so quickly. Contraceptives have a medical function, that of regulating menstrual cycles if their bodies do not take care of that. I believe only those kinds of emergency contraceptives should be supported due to their medical reasons
"A younger woman cannot rape an older guy", men can be raped too, you know, the effects are different.
It is true that both the victim and victimizer should be held accountable in order to know the truth as much as possible, but Justice has the punish the perpetrator and formulate rational ways, without biases, to avoid these situations. Many countries had very stupid solutions that are always centered on using the victims to avoid looking at the reality of the problem. (In Gorontalo-Indonesia, women cannot wear dresses that show skin, this being influenced by Muslim morale rather than rationality). Did rapes and sexual harassment cases decreased? nope, these actually had a slight increase. That is misogyny, when you put the blame on women only. These people failed on recognizing that the perpetrators were a huge part of the problem and at fault of this is by believing in the Sexual supremacy of Men.
This is why sexual equality is important and vital, it helps both genders to understand none cannot overpower the other
Social constructions are rubbish and useless, more based on fictitious expectations rather than factual reason
It is not ethical if a "sexually experienced" man requires his future wife to be a "virgin", unless the girl accepts. that is not what equality is about, it is not fair, but like I said again, if the girl accepts him, that's her deal. If we are in such a context, then it is fair and reasonable for "Sexually-Experienced" women to marry a "Virgin" boy, just as both "Virgins" and Sexually-experienced" individuals can do so, there is no ethical and moral problem.
I don't support Death Penalties because we are letting these bastards to have an easy escape, I want them to suffer hell in earth first, to have the punishment fit the crime.
I agree it is not "narrow" to respect your love life, but it depends on the substance within the flask.
No, it's not. You chose to risk an STD or not. You can’t control how and where you were born. We advantaged perfectly fine in other areas. Oh, I’m guessing your referring to the HIV/AIDs dangers?I had forgotten of that.
Oh, no, how dare a man criticize an all mighty-vagina owner. Yet again, woman are allowed to insult men sexually and grope all they like. She clearly is a slut if she’s having such sex she can afford the contraception. And paying someone pay for your sex sessions is prostitution. You are paying someone to have sex.
No, no, no. I was telling what the other person, though I will refrain from mentioning her name. I believe that anyone can anyone of any gender, orientation or age.
Indeed. As people say “don’t teach a woman to not get raped. Teach a man not rape’. However in itself is sexist/a little homophobic, as it assumes all victims are female and all attackers male. Men make up a fair amount of rape victims, near half in some places, but it seems so low that because most men are afraid to report it, and they will always be ridiculed. However, if one is wearing clothing meant to display the body in a sexual manner, and if she is so ‘confident in your body’, then you have no right to complain or call men rapists/perverts/pigs for having a sex drive. And again, they are allowed to fawn and giggle over men’s muscles, and butts, and whatnot. It is not‘misogynistic’ , it is ‘sexist’. Misogynistic is the hatred of women. Even if it is sexual, the person say things like that is just saying what they think will keep people more safe, as misguided the attitude is. The intention is good, but the method not. The thing about dresses is bloody ridiculous. Unless someone had some kind of fetish, who is going to be turned on by naked arms or legs?
Well, I’m sorry, but I can’t see heterosexual intercourse any other way. However, I do believe it can a romantic thing. I truly do, but it is also a great commitment for someone. The same goes for same-sex relationship of course.
I’m not explaining it again.
I used to think like that, but do you not dislike the fact that your tax money is keeping them alive? Yes, the whole ‘we don’t want to suffer’ is disgusting. What about the people or animals they made suffer. The person who’s body they violated, the person who took an innocent’s life. They need to suffer as much as their victims did, have it etched into their minds before they go to hell. Yes, there has sadly been many a mischarge of justice, but surely forensics have advanced to the point where it would hard to convict the wrong person.
The deal here is that both genders have to respect each other and treat each other well and fairly
Both genders can practice their sexualities in the ways they prefer (without stepping out of moral and ethical lines)
The rule is to live and let live.
Teaching people to not do horrible things to each other (both genders), will contribute to the reduction of rapes and sexual harassment. it is for both genders and parties to play the part and cooperate
On the death penalty, for bad news, society is very lenient in the way of treating criminals, it is a complicated issue indeed
Sorry this is so short for taking so long to reply. I didn’t really know what to say. I’m at least sure this time that there are fewer mistakes.
Well of course.
Again, of course.
Yes, but again, we cannot get rid of the typical attitudes completely. For example,in roughly…fifty years’ time (I’m just trying to be realistic, judging from how long it took women to gain most of their rights), men will be fully accepted as victims of abuse and rape.
Um-hm. Oh, I’m not saying that we should start bringing back public executions. That would endanger the public and cause suffering for the perpetrator’s family (unless they are the cause or were involved the perpetrator’s crimes, I believe they should be treated with the same respect as the victim’s loved ones). I just think we give them too much. However, I still believe they should have rights to books and art (recently my wonderful government tried to ban families bringing books, and books entirely, and later on art). I am very big on justice, but no-one, not even criminals or those in asylums, should be derived of the written word. Nor should art be banned. Yes, the things these…people…have created are disturbing, but, obviously, that also gives us in an insight into their mind. Yes, unless we are those ourselves, we can never completely understand the mind of such an individual, but research still should be done. Oh, and another important issue in that regard is famed people, celebrities, being treated more better and given more lenient sentences.
There I went, off topic again. I’m just a very political person, you see.
I see you are very informed Women and men need to redefine the concepts of what is masculine and what is feminine, our generation is a wonderful mosaic in comparison to older generations. We embody the complexity of human nature, not based of natural laws and social laws, but on our individuality and uniqueness. However I do believe our generation needs the value of social responsibility and drive for improvement. simply open your mind to new theories and ideas, and through them built your mosaic
Have you noticed I how wonderful is to discuss and have an open mind? Humans have the need for mental enrichment
Well, I don’t think we should label femininity or masculinity as ‘acting like a woman/man”. We should just think of them as traits, and which traits we perfer or display. And most of us are a mixture of both, anyway, as I am guessing you agree from the last sentence.
Yes, I do. Anyone would perfer it to arguing. Yes, I like having a good, pleasant conversation as much as any person, but sometimes, debate is good for learning or practicing communication.
Haven't we debated as well? We have put our ideas to the table and explained them in quite long comments as you will see But hey, it exercises the the mind to understand oneself and be open to new ideas, aye?
Sorry this took so long I've been...busy, let's just say that. Indeed. And I do so enjoy long comments I can think about and have to take time and thinking to respond to. Aye, sur. I'm getting to be a little more open with each of the better conversations.
Though you have every right to, I'm just disappointed that even though we are typing so calmly and eloquently to one another, you still insult me in your conversations with that lassie. And I don't block so fast nor, have any reason to block you. I only block spammers and invaders (people who jump onto your profile to leave insults).
Let me see the comments history......The only insult that I gave you was the word "ignorant"
Have you notice that in the later comments I stopped insulting? After that, there were critiques with no informal insulting
This happen many days ago, actually, there is no longer a need to insult, and that feeling took place days ago We showed each others' views eloquently with not much results, only having a truce of "agree to disagree"
But it's OK, these type of conversations are the ones that wake up my brain fully, it is good for the soul to inquire
*facepalms* She's really so misogynistic as to say that a woman is in part to blame if they get sexually harassed because they are confident with their body?? It doesn't matter what the woman is wearing, a man ought to have enough self control to respect another person. Never is an outfit grounds to harass anybody. I see a handsome man dressed in an admirable way but do I ever go up and start touching him? Fuck no. That's completely inappropriate in societal standards and in regards to his personal space and feelings. Women shouldn't have to hide themselves because some people can't control themselves and men shouldn't either. We should all have the self control and moral to not harass anybody just because they're dressed nicely or revealing. By her standards, everybody should go to the pool or beach in pants and long sleeved shirts >_>
It shouldn't be one or the other responsibility, it's BOTH sides responsibility to behave with restraint and respect. If somebody, man or woman, sees somebody passed out or very drunk, it's their responsibility to behave like a moral and respectful person and not take advantage. Even if that other person isn't doing so, SOMEBODY ought to. Just because somebody else is being irresponsible, that doesn't justify others to be as well. Never is it okay to take advantage of somebody who is incapacitated. Doing so makes you a pervert with no self control or respect.
As adults, it's our job to behave responsibly even if others are not. That's what being an adult is.
In regards to sex, she truly is ignorant about it if she thinks all STDs have obvious signs and that everybody is honest about having one. This simply proves that.
Even if people were to follow her sick little values, a virgin woman could hook up with a man who has had previous partners and he could give her an STD because he lied about it/didn't tell her, the symptoms were not present and/or he didn't know he had one because some people are just carriers. So now that woman has to suffer an STD even though she followed Naokos ridiculous rules and because in her little world, researching and treating STD is 'a waste' and in her world, a woman isn't allowed to be choosy about the men she hooks up with, only men are allowed to be choosy so she can't tell him no just because he's had partners before her. I wonder what she'd have to say to that!
Ah, again you Feminists are so quick to throw out that word. Again with the shaming of sexual men. Flirting is not 'harassment'. You can wear whatever you want, whenever you want, but just know that it may elicit certain feelings. Hell, you could be dressed in a Burka and I just know someone would be aroused. You just ignore it. You trying to see men can't do that is oppression and again, blatant hypocrisy when you consider all the rants about women's sexual 'freedom'. The flirting person is 'out of control'. They are acting on their lust. Nothing wrong with that. I used to wear mini-skirts with legs when a used to a bit more feminine, and sometimes (thankfully rarely) told that men were staring at my butt. Now, of course I was annoyed, being that, unlike some, my body is not an object, but did I start screaming and calling them perverts or rapists or anything? No, as that is their desire. They are free to it. I'm sure it has happened with my still-strong love of skinny jeans, though I've not been informed if so.
It is not 'taking advantage' if the drunken person is all over the other person.
As for STDs, no I do not think that. Again you all assume that because I am aversed to sex and will never be fucked does not mean I am unaware or uneducated in such things. I know perfectly well that some are even completely symptomless. I know people lie too. It's an embarrassing thing, is it not?
She (and so it would be for a he) choose to have sex and risk it. You cannot choose to have cancer (for the most person'), Leukaemia, asthma, psoriasis, AIDs/HIV, cystic fibrosis, Huntington’s disease, cerebral palsy, Down's Syndrome, epilepsy, Kleine-Levin syndrome, OVD, etc. Sorry to list such common ailments, but I was given you an idea. I even know that virgins can have some form of STD when they haven't so much as masturbated.
As usual, you have no fucking idea what you're even talking about.
Make up your damn mind. Is the world wrong for shaming sexual men or is the world wrong for shaming virgin men? Nobody is shaming anybody. I for one don't give a damn if whoever I'm with is a virgin or not. I do like a virgin man because they're more eager and not so quick to become bored like sexual men and that's my right to prefer virgin men. I can be choosy all I want. My body, I get to choose who touches it and who I have sex with.
No duh it's going to elicit certain feelings but when men start to cat call and touch that's inappropriate. Men are adults who should know how to behave despite how they're feeling. They're expected to behave maturely when they're pissed off, they're expected to behave maturely when they see a nice body or a nice pair or legs or what have you. It's not hypocritical to dress in shorts and a tanktop when it's 95 degrees f and expect men to not bother you over it. I dunno how hot it gets there but here in Oklahoma, you can literally fry an egg on your cars dashboard so I should be able to go out in my shorts and tank and not have to stress over men trying to touch me (in any way) or cat call and make inappropriate remarks. It's not a woman's job to put up with men, it's a man's job to not behave like a pig to begin with. Some women don't or can't handle those situations so it's unfair to them to have to put up with that kind of thing just because you think they have it coming because they wore shorts or a skirt and a top that shows some skin.
They have the right to find a woman attractive but it's inappropriate to make that woman feel uncomfortably in the outfit she has the right to wear. No woman should have to dress a certain way just to avoid piggish behavior.
If somebody is drunk and another person takes advantage of that, that's completely scummy. If a drunk person comes onto somebody who is sober, that, to me, seems a lot less scummy since the person being approached is fully capable of making decisions though the person doing the approaching might not have ordinarily done such a thing.
No, actually. Nobody is assuming you're uneducated about sex because you're asexual. We say you are uneducated about sex because of the things you have said yourself and are still saying. It's not about your sexuality. Seriously, get over it already. Nobody cares that you're asexual. People care that you're trying to stomp on female reproductive/sexual rights.
Exactly what kind of STD does a virgin get? By your silly set of rules, a woman is condemned even if she has sex with one man who has had partners before her (which you say is allowed) and has an STD that is passed to her. You call researching sex and the diseases a waste of resources but in reality, the aforementioned scenario is common. In your little world, she would be doomed to suffer an STD even though she followed your rules because in your world, no research would be done to find treatments and/or cures. If that man left her, she couldn't have sex ever again because of her STD and/or because in your world, she would be cheating on her next boyfriend.
Both sexual and non-sexual men are shamed. Sexual men are shamed for daring to have a sex drive and look at women in a sexual manner. Virgin men are shamed for not having yet put his penis into a woman’s vagina (as if that’s a big deal). And homosexual men are shamed for…being homosexual men, especially if they are on the bottom. And before you go saying I’m a hypocrite, a homosexual man is not letting someone of the opposite gender take and dominate him. No, it’s not.
No, it’s not. It’s natural and fine. That is shaming. Yes, they do, they are fully aware of they are doing, as I think you would know. It was your choice to wear those, as needed as it would be. It is the aroused man’s natural reaction in the form of hastily-put together words. It is not ‘inappropriate’ or being a ‘pig’. Again, you should your hypocrisy, in that woman are allowed to be as sexual as they want and no one is permitted a negative opinon, or they are ‘MISOGYNISTS!’, ‘SEXISTS!’ or ‘OPPRESSORS!!!!’. Again, they have no right to complain of being ‘bothered’ when they have already objectified themselves. I, along with other virgin woman, have a right to complain about that as we are not hypocrites, and we are in full control of our bodies. Then maybe she should grow a backbone. It is called equality. If girls are permitted to be as sexual as they want, so are men. And people are allowed a negative opinion on that. Non-virgin woman are hypocrites to judge and complain.
No, it’s not. It is not someone else’s job to stop or look after that drunk person, who choose to get drunk, unless they have requested such. Of course, if I were ever to have friends like that (I never would), I would not just abandon them like some holidaymakers and partygoers do, but I would let them make their own mistakes and learn the hard way. We all make mistakes.
Urgh, again with this. I am expressing my right to an opinion, on one’s choice, as is my right. I am not sitting there whining about freedom of speech and truth equality like you faux-feminists who think all sexual women are perfect, ‘liberated’ beings. If I were to get behind the wheel of a car and went barrelling down the motorway, I would know I would be judged and insulted. That would be someone’s right to do so. If I were to write something in my original story is incredibly narmy, far too cliché, or just plain stupid, I would be judged for it, and people would be free to it. Sex is no different. What is so bloody hard to understand about that, ‘feminist’? You lot also constantly assume that the sex thing is my whole life and think me some heartless idiot, when, if you had actually read my journals and got to know me, would know I have other interests and pursuits, and hold empathy and care within me. You assume I know not of simple things like masturbation, wet dreams, arousal, orgasms, dominatrixes (even if she is ‘dominant’, it is in a typically false, feminine manner, such as that of the femme fatale, and she usually has been/will let herself be penetrated). While we are of course equals and make choices together, I am dominant as I control myself, and take charge emotionally. I’m it would count for physically as well, as I would be the one to make the protective moves (as I’m not some damsel-in-distress who likes a man being a chauvinist, chivalrous pig). I’m also the one to resort to defensive/arger-caused violence, as well, though I know most would not consider that a good thing. And the stereotypical kind of violent of slapping. Finally, as I said, we kiss, hug and hold each other.
Oral herpes, for one. You can also gain diseases from towels or toilet seats, given that people have done things on them (that, combined with my great mysophobia), keeps from public bathrooms as much as possible. Ok, the thing about her never having sex again is understandable, if she was planning to have a baby some time. That would not be fair.
No one 'deserves' rape. I never said nor implied that. Your lot keep saying I should be raped. And even if that were to happen, you fail to see the problem: I would be a virgin, and therefore not a hypocrite, and even though I would technically be a non-virgin and traumatized, it could happen again, as I would not have willing given my body to other.
What the? You do not deserve to be raped. No-one deserves that.if they are indeed saying that they are in the wrong. People are suggesting you try some stuff voluntarily out yourself because maybe if you did you would stop thinking getting off is some abomination unto woman kind. I don't know why you fear it so much or hate it or whatever but frankly you need to get over that fear because it's making you sound horrible. But no-one seriously wants to force you.
If you don't think women deserve it that's good but you come across as very hateful. If a woman was raped, virgin or not, a normal person would feel compassion and horror,. It doesn't matter if she is s virgin or what she's wearing or if she's germy or anything. It's horrible and traumatic no matter what. But you don't seem to care at all if it happens to be someone you deem a 'slut' this is heartless. If it happened to a woman (or man) you don't say she's a hypocrite for complaining you help her and try to get justice for what's happened.
If you want people to leave you alone try turning around. Try saying, or at least consider non-virgins are people too and aren't some evil germy sex-crazed zombies trying to hurt men or oppress them. I don't know why you think that.
I do not ‘fear’ it. Or anything sexual. It is their sexist, oppressive, double standard filled, petty, misandric attitude that I do not like. I would not need to be so hard if they were not such whiney little wimps dressing up their whinging and fear of judgment as ‘feminism’. Thank you for separating yourself from these…others.
I do feel compassion – for those who are actually suffering. I feel no sympathy for hypocrites getting their karma and not understand that that trauma and pain they suffer is them realizing and regretting throwing themselves at a man for no good reason. I am not ‘heartless’ and have mentioned numerous times the evidence that proves I am not, reasons that apply to yourselves too, I’m certain – I give to charity, I really want to help the poor in person, I fight for men and women’s rights, I fight against the dismissal and humiliation of male abuse and rape victims. I fight for GLBT rights, of course. I am a political person and try to fight, or at least bring attention to, injustice in the political world. Those others keep judging me and thinking they know me when they know nothing of me, and keep spouting the same clichés and pseudo-intelligent babble.
Again, it is their attitude. They will not stop whinging about people’s right to an opinion on their choice, so why should others stop having that rightful, just opinion? And they are germy, like it or not. We are all germy. Non-virgin woman, due to the way sex works, be it hetero or homosexual, just carry that little bit more. They are people, then. Just very immature people. They are girls.
"I do not ‘fear’ it. Or anything sexual. It is their sexist, oppressive, double standard filled, petty, misandric attitude that I do not like."
And non-virgins contain these attributes so often... why? Why do you see them all like that?
"would not need to be so hard if they were not such whiney little wimps dressing up their whinging and fear of judgment as ‘feminism’. "
You seem to be hung up on the whole "feminism" word. Why not scribble it out and replace the word with "women who want the same things men get while men get what women have." and tell me why that's so bad. It seems fair to me.
"I do feel compassion – for those who are actually suffering. I feel no sympathy for hypocrites getting their karma and not understand that that trauma and pain they suffer is them realizing and regretting throwing themselves at a man for no good reason. "
And this exception to your compassion is why people are getting upset at you. There shouldn't be any exception at all. A woman isn't hurting anyone by having a sexual relationship with anyone (a man, woman, inbetween, or herself) unless she is raping someone. Why is it karma that she get's hurt so severely then? How can you not feel bad for someone who goes through something so horrible? Even if what a woman was doing was wrong, that's like saying someone who steals deserves torture, it's beyond extreme.
"I am not ‘heartless’ and have mentioned numerous times the evidence that proves I am not, reasons that apply to yourselves too, I’m certain – I give to charity, I really want to help the poor in person, I fight for men and women’s rights, I fight against the dismissal and humiliation of male abuse and rape victims. I fight for GLBT rights, of course. I am a political person and try to fight, or at least bring attention to, injustice in the political world. " Well, yeah, okay. That may be true. And I couldn't really say you were some ruthless monster out of the pits of hell even without you saying that. It still doesn't make what you're saying about non-virgins right though.
Thing is, try looking it from other's point of view. Take homophobia, which you are adamant against. If some homophobic guy went on some hate-speech saying gay men who get bashed are only getting God's will and it's what they get for defiling their bodies with some evil sin or whatever nonsense a homophobic person says, what are you going to do? Call him out on what he's saying? Call him a bad person? What if he turns around at these accusations, and says "But I'm not a bad person, I donate to charity, I fight against racism, etc etc.." would you, should you, say "Jinkies! I had no idea! You're a swell guy after all! Just let me turn my back and allow you to continue on with your little hate speech!" Or would you say "That's all very well and nice, but what you're doing is still wrong and you really should stop."
"Those others keep judging me and thinking they know me when they know nothing of me, and keep spouting the same clichés and pseudo-intelligent babble. " That pseudo-intellectual babble is others trying to reason with you. But you're right, they don't know you, no-body does, they are making judgements based on what they have observed so far. But you can help by letting them or others get to know you, and you try getting to know them and other non-virgins and see that they aren't so bad people. Maybe a bit more reasoning on what your problem is/ are, because (I admit this is just a guess) some of your dislike might be stemming from something that happened to you IRL. Maybe some girl was a bitch to you, maybe your Dad was a jerk, IDK. And they have been guessing, because they want to know why you have all this hate, or "dislike".
"Again, it is their attitude. They will not stop whinging about people’s right to an opinion on their choice, so why should others stop having that rightful, just opinion?" Well yeah, we all have our right to free-speech. They have theirs and you have yours. It's just kind of getting a bit of conflict regarding the nature of their arguing: rape. Which is a serious form of violence, which nobody wants. And you don't want someone around encouraging violence, do you? They don't want some rape victim seeing what you wrote and getting hurt, or some psycho reading this and getting the idea it's okay to rape someone.
"And they are germy, like it or not. We are all germy. Non-virgin woman, due to the way sex works, be it hetero or homosexual, just carry that little bit more. " So? We can argue whether or not non-virgins are germy (and frankly I'm stumped why you would think a girl who jills off gets "germy", or at least germy in the manner it can't be washed off or cause a serious illness). But in the end, so what? People who work with sewage are germy. People in poorer countries are germy. Lots of people are germy. Pilots are at risk of getting who knows how many diseases. Should they be looked down upon for eg. say their choices in career etc? Should they be treated any less? Does it mean they should be attacked and that it serves them right, or that it serves them right if they contract a serious illness that it's just "karma" and no-one should help them?
"They are people, then. Just very immature people. They are girls. " Once again, So? Lots of people are immature. I'm immature a lot of the time. It's no reason to not feel bad for them when they get raped.
I do not see them all like that. They are just what I encounter most when simply browsing for me own means, some whiney little flower on Tumblr, Feminsite, Jezebel, LiveJournal This Slut Votes, the SlutWalk bullshit that is still going on, an affront to feminism (it just made our reputation fall even lower), and self respecting women everywhere. This very deviation (along with many, selfish, sexist, petty others) is an example of such an attitude. This being the ‘anti-abortion is ANTI-WOMENZ!” when they turn around and be completely anti-responsibility, anti-male, and selfish. They claim that medical and necessary ultrasound (yes, it is necessary, to make sure the woman is absolutely willing to murder something she once was in one of the greatest acts of hypocrisy there can be), when they already been penetrated by a germ-riddled penis. There is nothing ‘sexist’, ‘misogynistic’ or ‘controlling women’s bodies’ or ‘reproductive rights’. It is hypocrisy, they already gave their body to another.
But it is not that. They want to be free from all rightful, equality-supporting judgement and criticism will they scream at men for doing so much as harmless wolf whistling, while they call men perverts and rapists for daring to express their sexuality. And most laughably of all, they say, that men being sexually attracted to them, is ‘misogynistic’. I fight for actually rights, something few feminists do nowadays, continuing to add to our reputation. As a result, people who support men’s rights too are told to call themselves ‘humanists’. Don’t get wrong, I don’t mind the title, but the problem is that feminist is seen as a bad thing, and girls like this are not helping.
Yes she is. She is spreading germs and most likely disease as well. She is insulting feminism and naturalness of pregnancy. If I were stolen from if I steal before, I would have no reason to complain, no non-virgin women have nothing to complain about. I understand that some easily-offended people might be upset about this, being that it is true equality (taking responsibility for one’s actions, instead of calling it ‘victim blaming’. but I simply do not support hypocrisy. And yes, I know we are all hypocrites. If she was engaged or marriage and that happened, even if she had sex with her fiancé, husband or wife, as she has made a commitment to someone.
Well, thank you. Well, I’m sorry, but it is just the way I think, and it is made worse because of these selfish attitudes that exist. If a woman were to just have sex for pleasure with her partner, behind closed doors, that would be fine, they are not affection anyone else. It is when they scream about non-existent ‘double standards’, while ignoring the biological logical behind such a (perfectly allowed) opinon, and say that having casual sex is good, and, as I said, shoving their non-virginity and so-called ‘liberation’ (when it is far from it) down everyone’s throats, instead of focusing on real issues. A good ‘feminist blog’ I have found is The Mary Sue, for example. She cares about women and men and fights against bigger issues (as well as sexism in pop culture/fiction, something seen as trivial and meaningless, despite how much it effects and has effected real life).
The difference is, having recreational heterosexual intercourse is a choice. Homosexuality, no matter what some cunts say, is not a choice. It is natural attraction to the same gender. Yes, heterosexual lust and attraction is natural too I know. It is just that homosexual intercourse is far less likely to be selfish (that’s not to say there is not homosexual manipulators or rapists). I also understand that homosexuals are not perfect, as well, but that they are simply human, and humans judge and are judged, make choices, sometimes stupid/pointless/selfish ones.
No, no, if someone wants to have a calm conversation about it, then I am happy. Just as I would be happy to have a conversation with a homophobe is understand why they think (well, if it were reasons outside ‘it’s an abomination!’ or ‘God says so!’). Those are the very clichés, though. That it was thought it by religion, that I was molested/raped, or (and I laughed at this) dumped for a sexually active girl. You say it is because of my mother or my ‘father’ that I have ‘daddy issues’ ( I couldn’t care less about my ‘father’, and I was barely a year old when my mother left him), and my mother, like all good parents, taught me and give me the tools to learn, but let me think for myself. It is those attitudes (the father/rape thing) that annoys me. They also came out with crap that Matt is only with me as he hopes to get sex one day, and that we won’t last because we don’t have sex and that ‘when his balls drop’ he dump me for someone else, even though they are plenty of non-sexual ways to be romantic. We kiss on the lips, for example.They know nothing of our relationship, how long we’ve known each other (and when I explained such, of course they did not believe me, and continued with their perceived image of me), while being all smug about their ‘normal’ and not ‘shallow’ relationships.
Well, as I’ve said before, no matter how much we wash down there, we will still produce natural but disgusting fluids. You can’t ‘wash off’ one of biggest changes in your life (and that fact is that is considered something so little nowadays is so…cold). No, those are needed, as they need those jobs to live, or to enjoy life, and those germs, bar the sewage, are not so intimate.
Oh, and I never thought non-virgins were not human. I was just sick of the rage so I threw out a sarcastic comment. Again, it’s the hypocrisy bit. I at least acknowledge the ways in wish I am hypocritical, an example being I am and consider myself a strong woman, but insult that but my needless crying. I don’t like boastful or cocky people, but like most people, I boast sometimes as well. Again, an overused statement, but we are human.
“I do not see them all like that. They are just what I encounter most when simply browsing for me own means, some whiney little flower on Tumblr, Feminsite, Jezebel, LiveJournal This Slut Votes, the SlutWalk bullshit that is still going on, an affront to feminism (it just made our reputation fall even lower), and self respecting women everywhere.”
And why are you going to those sites in the first place?
“This very deviation (along with many, selfish, sexist, petty others) is an example of such an attitude. This being the ‘anti-abortion is ANTI-WOMENZ!” when they turn around and be completely anti-responsibility, anti-male, and selfish. They claim that medical and necessary ultrasound (yes, it is necessary, to make sure the woman is absolutely willing to murder something she once was in one of the greatest acts of hypocrisy there can be), when they already been penetrated by a germ-riddled penis. There is nothing ‘sexist’, ‘misogynistic’ or ‘controlling women’s bodies’ or ‘reproductive rights’. It is hypocrisy, they already gave their body to another. “
Because you know it is their own body which they own (and still own no matter who they have sex with), and have a right to preserve their own life if a pregnancy might risk her life or a possible child’s well-being. And yeah it is irresponsible if a woman goes around screwing willy nilly without protection. But it’s waaay more irresponsible to bring a life into the world where the woman has neither the finances nor the competence to look after a child which ends up with a kid starving to death in a cupboard in a pile of its own faeces because the mother knows squat about raising children. An abortion on the other hand is terminating a “life” before it begins a life of suffering. And just because an embryo was what each of us where at that point doesn’t mean we should preserve it. We were an ovum once, does that mean every time a woman has her period she is committing murder?
“But it is not that. They want to be free from all rightful, equality-supporting judgement and criticism will they scream at men for doing so much as harmless wolf whistling, while they call men perverts and rapists for daring to express their sexuality. And most laughably of all, they say, that men being sexually attracted to them, is ‘misogynistic’. I fight for actually rights, something few feminists do nowadays, continuing to add to our reputation. As a result, people who support men’s rights too are told to call themselves ‘humanists’. Don’t get wrong, I don’t mind the title, but the problem is that feminist is seen as a bad thing, and girls like this are not helping.”
If a guy (or a girl) is running around in the privacy of her home oogling over porn or something, this is expressing their sexuality and these girls should mind their own business. If a guy (or a girl) is out on the streets harassing someone this isn’t expressing their sexuality, they’re being a jerk, and it’s what people do to rile people up. I mean, you didn’t like it when you started getting all this attention lately, and you complained, why can’t they? But no, someone “wolf-whistling” isn’t a rapist. They may be over-reacting, but then, what have you been doing lately on certain other sites?
“Yes she is. She is spreading germs and most likely disease as well.”
Not if she’s getting the guy to wear a rubber, she isn’t. Or, you know, jilling off on her own (who would she be spreading the “germs” to?). Or people who get blood tests first, to make sure they haven’t got anything before they do anything.
If she knew she had something and intentionally spread something, yeah, that would be wrong though. Most of the time though, people try to stop the spread of disease.
“She is insulting feminism and naturalness of pregnancy.”
And an insult is seriously harmful, because…?
“If I were stolen from if I steal before, I would have no reason to complain, no non-virgin women have nothing to complain about.”
Ummm, no no no no. Stealing can’t even begin to equate with something like rape. Stealing is a petty crime (which is why I gave an example before), while rape is extreme violence, and there is never any excuse for it. And why would consensual sex be considered stealing? Because she gave her body once to a guy and it belongs to him now? That’s like saying people have the right to steal then vandalise e a bunch of books from a library which lends out books just because it some people have borrowed from it before.
You don’t get a book from a library to keep forever, you RETURN it. And you don’t damage it, because it still isn’t your property. You take it for an allotted period of time with your library card, enjoy it, then give it back. If you don’t, or take the book without permission, you’re in trouble, and the librarian has every right to send you a fine. And as such, if a man or woman rapes a person they should be punished for it as no-one has the right to have sex without someone’s consent.
“I understand that some easily-offended people might be upset about this, being that it is true equality (taking responsibility for one’s actions, instead of calling it ‘victim blaming’. but I simply do not support hypocrisy. And yes, I know we are all hypocrites. If she was engaged or marriage and that happened, even if she had sex with her fiancé, husband or wife, as she has made a commitment to someone.”
Commitments can end. And committing to one person does not mean committing to every other single male on the planet for the rest of eternity.
“Well, thank you. Well, I’m sorry, but it is just the way I think, and it is made worse because of these selfish attitudes that exist. If a woman were to just have sex for pleasure with her partner, behind closed doors, that would be fine, they are not affection anyone else.”
Which is what “non-virgins” do. (Or should be doing).
“It is when they scream about non-existent ‘double standards’, while ignoring the biological logical behind such a (perfectly allowed) opinon, and say that having casual sex is good, and, as I said, shoving their non-virginity and so-called ‘liberation’ (when it is far from it) down everyone’s throats, instead of focusing on real issues. A good ‘feminist blog’ I have found is The Mary Sue, for example. She cares about women and men and fights against bigger issues (as well as sexism in pop culture/fiction, something seen as trivial and meaningless, despite how much it effects and has effected real life).”
Abortion is a real issue though.
“The difference is, having recreational heterosexual intercourse is a choice. Homosexuality, no matter what some cunts say, is not a choice. It is natural attraction to the same gender. Yes, heterosexual lust and attraction is natural too I know. It is just that homosexual intercourse is far less likely to be selfish (that’s not to say there is not homosexual manipulators or rapists). I also understand that homosexuals are not perfect, as well, but that they are simply human, and humans judge and are judged, make choices, sometimes stupid/pointless/selfish ones.”
How is heterosexual sex selfish? “Germs”? Once again you have condoms and blood-tests for that. Pregnancy? Okay, if homosexual sex is better because it can’t result in pregnancy, what about women who are infertile. Women who have gone past menopause? Girls who are above legal age but haven’t finished puberty (it’s 2-3 years after a girl starts bleeding before she starts ovulating). A woman who is on her period? Women who use contraceptives? None of these will result in pregnancy either so why not group them with homosexuals too?
“No, no, if someone wants to have a calm conversation about it, then I am happy. Just as I would be happy to have a conversation with a homophobe is understand why they think (well, if it were reasons outside ‘it’s an abomination!’ or ‘God says so!’).”
Okay
“Those are the very clichés, though. That it was thought it by religion, that I was molested/raped, or (and I laughed at this) dumped for a sexually active girl. You say it is because of my mother or my ‘father’ that I have ‘daddy issues’ ( I couldn’t care less about my ‘father’, and I was barely a year old when my mother left him), and my mother, like all good parents, taught me and give me the tools to learn, but let me think for myself. It is those attitudes (the father/rape thing) that annoys me.”
It was a guess. People come up with these things because your ideas had to come from somewhere. I don’t get it though. You just one day (or took a while to come up with this) decided to say “non-virgins can’t be raped”?
“They also came out with crap that Matt is only with me as he hopes to get sex one day, and that we won’t last because we don’t have sex and that ‘when his balls drop’ he dump me for someone else, even though they are plenty of non-sexual ways to be romantic. We kiss on the lips, for example.They know nothing of our relationship, how long we’ve known each other (and when I explained such, of course they did not believe me, and continued with their perceived image of me), while being all smug about their ‘normal’ and not ‘shallow’ relationships.”
I’m kind of guessing it was to get you riled up. And in some cases out there this does happen in relationships. People change. Your BF might change. YOU might change. It might be something to keep in mind, at least as a mental exercise. And no, no-one knows how you and your BF are, that’s your businesses’.
“Well, as I’ve said before, no matter how much we wash down there, we will still produce natural but disgusting fluids.”
It isn’t that disgusting.
“You can’t ‘wash off’ one of biggest changes in your life (and that fact is that is considered something so little nowadays is so…cold). No, those are needed, as they need those jobs to live, or to enjoy life, and those germs, bar the sewage, are not so intimate. “
Except we do need sex to enjoy life. I mean, why should I or any women go every minute every day every year for the rest of their lives never getting any relief from an irritating cramp or burning down there for? Why put up with that?
“Oh, and I never thought non-virgins were not human. I was just sick of the rage so I threw out a sarcastic comment. Again, it’s the hypocrisy bit. I at least acknowledge the ways in wish I am hypocritical, an example being I am and consider myself a strong woman, but insult that but my needless crying. I don’t like boastful or cocky people, but like most people, I boast sometimes as well. Again, an overused statement, but we are human.”
I was curious as to what others who claim to be feminists believe.
No, they have not right to be selfish, hypocritical monsters. They were a foetus once, they were once that ‘parasite’, that ‘accident’, that ‘mistake’, that [insert other, sick, disgusting words for an innocent life here]. Every thing on the planet is technically a parasite, as we must feed on another living thing to survive (most plants are perhaps the expection). Besides, a parasite is defined as a creature of other species. No, it was irresponsible for her to go sleeping around full stop. Pregnancy does not to be ‘protected’ from. Nor is it an ‘accident’ or ‘unwanted’. If it was, that woman would not have choosen to have sex. If she could not ‘afford it’ (which is bullshit anyway), or ‘was not ready’ then she would not be ready to have a penis inside her. Pregnancy, apart from childbirth, is nothing compared to sex that came before it. No one can predict the future. My mother given the suggestion to abort me because of my conditions, they said I would never walk, talk, read or write. And I’ve done that and so much more. How would she have known that if she was so selfish (not to mention she wanted a child). If the ‘women’ (or stupid, selfish girl) really is so heartless and inhuman, then she can find another family to give the child to. It is not ‘selfish’, it is not ‘sexist’, it is not ‘oppressive’ or ‘trying to control women’ (when they have allowed themselves to be controlled by men), it is equality for all. And again, just like others who believe that disgusting, selfish, sexist attitude, you ignore the potential suffering of the man who just lost his child. That’s not utterly sexist, a double standard, and hypocritical or anything. Here we go with the period excuse. That, again, is natural. Simple. Just like pregnancy is.
Not if they are boasting about it and calling it their ‘feminist right’ or whatever. It is not ‘harassment’ or when that girl has already broken that great boundary. She is hypocritical to complain as she is a sexual being. It is natural, as OMG, men have a right to a sex drive as well. I just keep coming back to correct the idiotic assumptions and pettiness of these compete strangers.
As I said, it gives feminism a bad name and encourages selfishness and sexism against men.
It is not ‘extreme’. They are far more extreme things you can do to harm the body, my dear. Rape is not some special crime. It is simply abuse as horrid as any other. Let me give another example then – if I were hit someone who did not deserve it, then I could not complain about someone else striking me, as I’ve already done that. Excluding the marriage/engagement thing I mentioned, that girl is a hypocrite for claiming rape as she had already been penetrated and regardless of the damage, it makes no difference to her status. And I also explained why she is really traumatized, but again, that is not make the mental suffering any less real.
That’s not what I meant. What I meant is, if a virgin woman became engaged or married someone, male or female, and even if they were to have sex with them, they could still be raped, as they have made a commitment to someone and that violator is also violating the commitment. As for the other bit, if a virgin woman were to have sex with a man/woman and commit to them, then for some reason they break up (I’m not saying it is her fault), and she get manages to get a relationship with another man or woman, she is a hypocrite if she ever claims he or she is ‘cheating’ on or ‘betraying’ her, as she already cheated on them. They just had the kindness and goodness to forgive her (they do that if they pursue the relationship). If that woman was a widow, however, then I suppose it can be considered cheating on the other partner’s part (you know, the whole ‘death do us part’ bit).
Well, they don’t.
No, it is not an ‘issue’. The issue is that it exists for non-rape reasons.
I already explained – the selfishness in regards to pregnancy and the possible betrayal. They have no reason to have sex, but can still chose to if they wish. Again, I never said or implied I would stop anyone making that choice. I am not one of those disgusting people who think a woman who does not want children (again, if she did not, she would not partake in heterosexual intercourse for ‘fun’), or is infertile is horrible person or, sickeningly, ‘broken’. Again, it’s the attitudes I dislike.
I’ve said that before too. As my mother was not one to lie, when I put forth the big baby question at six, she bought me a book (for children) called “Where do I Come From?. Of course, these idiots on here think she ‘traumatized me’ and that a six year old could not possibility understand such a thing. The other parents were like that too, “*gasp* it has nude pictures! That’s obscene!”. And as I learned more in reproduction lessons (what you would call ‘sex ed’, I’m guessing) in science in first and second year, then biology and human biology the rest, I began to formulate my views, as I thought about the way sex worked.
I can safely say I will never be interested in sex. Yes, I might want to get pregnant someday, you never know (but not in the ‘my biological clock is ticking’ kind of way), but I still wholly wish to adopt, but only when I’ve had my life first. I have my friends, my writing, my curiosity, until then. Yes, I’ve stopped judging other people’s non-marital relationships as being more then just sex, so maybe they should stop their stereotyping of mine. People also think he a ‘doormat’ because he dares do what a woman tells him, and think that he wishes to ‘protect’ or ‘save’ when he’s anything but a chauvinist pig. A certain someone also thinks he’ll agree if anything I see because if not, I would ‘rage’ and thinks that I am also ‘raging’. Another stereotype, as her experiences do not apply to all.
They contain waste products. How can they not be disgusting? And most women don’t exactly look forward to periods.
If you ‘need’ sex (sex is not a ‘need’ unless you are a man unable to come from masturbation or wet dreams), then you are a pretty sad person indeed. What does that say for asexuals?
“I was curious as to what others who claim to be feminists believe. “
Fair enough
“No, they have not right to be selfish, hypocritical monsters. They were a foetus once, they were once that ‘parasite’, that ‘accident’, that ‘mistake’, that [insert other, sick, disgusting words for an innocent life here]. Every thing on the planet is technically a parasite, as we must feed on another living thing to survive (most plants are perhaps the expection). Besides, a parasite is defined as a creature of other species. No, it was irresponsible for her to go sleeping around full stop. Pregnancy does not to be ‘protected’ from. Nor is it an ‘accident’ or ‘unwanted’. If it was, that woman would not have choosen to have sex. If she could not ‘afford it’ (which is bullshit anyway), or ‘was not ready’ then she would not be ready to have a penis inside her. Pregnancy, apart from childbirth, is nothing compared to sex that came before it. No one can predict the future. My mother given the suggestion to abort me because of my conditions, they said I would never walk, talk, read or write. And I’ve done that and so much more. How would she have known that if she was so selfish (not to mention she wanted a child).”
I can see why you place a lot of value in “pro-life” considering your circumstances. Your case was a success story. This doesn’t always happen though, and there a lot of negative experiences out there that people are considering when having an abortion as well. And your case may just have easily have failed. What if you couldn’t walk or talk? What if you couldn’t see at all, and not hear?
What if your mother didn’t know how to raise a child and neglected to look after you? Yeah, like I said, people should be responsible and not get pregnant in the first place if they realise they can’t be parents (and some people are never “ready”). But to expect them to never have sex because of this is a bit much, but I’ll get to that later…
“If the ‘women’ (or stupid, selfish girl) really is so heartless and inhuman, then she can find another family to give the child to.”
You do realise how many orphans there are that never get people to look after them, right? And how rough it is for them, right?
“It is not ‘selfish’, it is not ‘sexist’, it is not ‘oppressive’ or ‘trying to control women’ (when they have allowed themselves to be controlled by men), it is equality for all. And again, just like others who believe that disgusting, selfish, sexist attitude, you ignore the potential suffering of the man who just lost his child. That’s not utterly sexist, a double standard, and hypocritical or anything.”
Thought exercise: what if it was the woman who wanted to keep the child, and the man who wanted her to get the abortion, because he didn’t want the responsibility? Guys do that sometimes, you know.
“Here we go with the period excuse. That, again, is natural. Simple. Just like pregnancy is.”
Miscarriages are natural too.
“Not if they are boasting about it and calling it their ‘feminist right’ or whatever. It is not ‘harassment’ or when that girl has already broken that great boundary. She is hypocritical to complain as she is a sexual being. It is natural, as OMG, men have a right to a sex drive as well. I just keep coming back to correct the idiotic assumptions and pettiness of these compete strangers.”
She has a right to complain. People need to work and study in harassment free environments. And harassment has little to do with sex drive and more to do with the harasser wanting to get a reaction out of the harrassee.
“As I said, it gives feminism a bad name and encourages selfishness and sexism against men. “
Some girls out there do. Maybe these bloggers or whatever are idiots but that doesn’t mean women everywhere who have a sex drive have to put up with men being an ass. It’s wrong for a woman to do that to a man so why not vice versa?
“It is not ‘extreme’. They are far more extreme things you can do to harm the body, my dear. Rape is not some special crime. It is simply abuse as horrid as any other.”
Yes that is true there are worse things. It is still a serious crime though.
“ Let me give another example then – if I were hit someone who did not deserve it, then I could not complain about someone else striking me, as I’ve already done that.”
Hitting someone is a form of harm. Having consensual sex with someone is not a form of harm. It is a reward; the guy and girl (or whatever variation of sexes) are enjoying each other’s company. If someone hit you after you gave them a reward that would be rather unfair wouldn’t it?
“Excluding the marriage/engagement thing I mentioned, that girl is a hypocrite for claiming rape as she had already been penetrated and regardless of the damage, it makes no difference to her status. And I also explained why she is really traumatized, but again, that is not make the mental suffering any less real.”
Her status.
So according to you, never mind the physical trauma, her reproductive (and possibly internal) organs bleeding, the lack of security, the disgust. It’s her status that she has to worry about. If she doesn’t have that, then why worry? Her status is such a precious thing to lose if she gave it up before it’s karma if she gets raped. She should never have given up her “status”. But if she was a virgin who lost her “status”, it’s a horrible atrocity.
Is that seriously what you’re saying?
“That’s not what I meant. What I meant is, if a virgin woman became engaged or married someone, male or female, and even if they were to have sex with them, they could still be raped, as they have made a commitment to someone and that violator is also violating the commitment. As for the other bit, if a virgin woman were to have sex with a man/woman and commit to them, then for some reason they break up (I’m not saying it is her fault), and she get manages to get a relationship with another man or woman, she is a hypocrite if she ever claims he or she is ‘cheating’ on or ‘betraying’ her, as she already cheated on them. They just had the kindness and goodness to forgive her (they do that if they pursue the relationship). If that woman was a widow, however, then I suppose it can be considered cheating on the other partner’s part (you know, the whole ‘death do us part’ bit).”
How can she cheat on him if she at the time didn’t even know him? How do you betray someone you don’t even know? Didn’t you already say you can’t predict the future? What if your BF decides to leave you or you leave him, does that mean you’ve already betrayed the next man (or woman) who loves you?
“Well, they don’t.”
You cannot judge the behaviour of the majority of “non-virgins” based on the opinions of a bunch of bloggers or LJers you found online.
“No, it is not an ‘issue’. The issue is that it exists for non-rape reasons.” It kind of is. It’s discussed on the news or talk shows and magazines quite a bit sometimes.
“I already explained – the selfishness in regards to pregnancy and the possible betrayal. They have no reason to have sex, but can still chose to if they wish. Again, I never said or implied I would stop anyone making that choice. I am not one of those disgusting people who think a woman who does not want children (again, if she did not, she would not partake in heterosexual intercourse for ‘fun’), or is infertile is horrible person or, sickeningly, ‘broken’. Again, it’s the attitudes I dislike.”
Okay
“I’ve said that before too. As my mother was not one to lie, when I put forth the big baby question at six, she bought me a book (for children) called “Where do I Come From?. Of course, these idiots on here think she ‘traumatized me’ and that a six year old could not possibility understand such a thing. The other parents were like that too, “*gasp* it has nude pictures! That’s obscene!”. And as I learned more in reproduction lessons (what you would call ‘sex ed’, I’m guessing) in science in first and second year, then biology and human biology the rest, I began to formulate my views, as I thought about the way sex worked.”
No offense, but I think you do seem kind of traumatised, but more likely from your “sex-ed”. It might not even be caused by either, but whatever the cause, you simply had some sort of issue with things and people speculated why that would be. And no, you’re not curled up on the bed in a catatonic state, but you seem to be highly concerned with virginity and STD’s and “germy penises” that most people don’t worry about. And yeah I know you go out and do other things and live life. But it has affected you in your behaviour towards others.
“I can safely say I will never be interested in sex. Yes, I might want to get pregnant someday, you never know (but not in the ‘my biological clock is ticking’ kind of way), but I still wholly wish to adopt, but only when I’ve had my life first. I have my friends, my writing, my curiosity, until then. Yes, I’ve stopped judging other people’s non-marital relationships as being more then just sex, so maybe they should stop their stereotyping of mine.
People also think he a ‘doormat’ because he dares do what a woman tells him, and think that he wishes to ‘protect’ or ‘save’ when he’s anything but a chauvinist pig. A certain someone also thinks he’ll agree if anything I see because if not, I would ‘rage’ and thinks that I am also ‘raging’. Another stereotype, as her experiences do not apply to all.”
I’m staying out of that.
“They contain waste products. How can they not be disgusting? And most women don’t exactly look forward to periods.”
Cum? It’s usually clean if a guy or girl washes beforehand and considered a fun and safe product of the body. Some people have even tried consuming it
“If you ‘need’ sex (sex is not a ‘need’ unless you are a man unable to come from masturbation or wet dreams), then you are a pretty sad person indeed. What does that say for asexuals?”
Well, sexual release anyway, I should have said sexual activity. What can I say though, women have needs. It’s like needing to go to the toilet, you can hold it off as you need to be sociably acceptable, but you can’t hold it off forever, and you can’t expect couples and people everywhere to hold it off indefinitely because say they don’t want kids. It’s kind of cruel, don’t you think?
I don’t know what it says about asexuals, I really can’t say. I’m not going to say “OMG you’re missing out on this fun!” As that would be condescending. It would be nice not to not be concerned with “OMG these women should be strong proud honourable virgins!” as that is sort of condescending too.
I also support it because of equality. Equality for all. And while it is not the reason why, I am also sick of the ‘feminists’ who scream that being anti-abortion is automatically ‘anti-women’no matter what. Another example is a old secondary school friend of mine. She was born at roughly the same time as me (well, I was fourteen weeks early, her a month), and she weighed even less than me, and has/had worse eyesight (well, I was born blind and she could see, but hers became worse than mine from a very young age) and she made it through as well, she did those things as well. Babies are strong. There would still be ways to live. Everyone deserves a life unless they ruin the life of another. If you have that attitude, what does that say for deafblind children, or children/adults who cannot look after themselves at all (due to a mental condition or underdevelopment). And even when it comes to criminals, I still think they deserve the right to books and art (my government recently tried to ban both). It sounds cheesy, these stories, I know, but real life can be like that sometimes.
Well, then that would be her fault, and if that were the situation, I would hope I was given a better home. Yes, abuse is disgusting no matter what, but many people have risen above such a thing. Again, they chose to have sex. The intelligent and most responsible thing would be to do that, but I know not everyone can resist lust. She is just selfish if she tries to get rid of it if or when it happens.
Of course I do. And while I know I cannot help them all, if I can at least give one, or two (I would still feel horrible about the children I’ve left behind) a good, loving home, I will had made some difference, even if it is so insignificant and will make no difference over all. It is because people are too selfish to adopt. Yes, you are free to have children the biological way, but I just wish people would consider adopting more. And besides, what’s to stop someone having a child biologically and from adoption. They are just as much your children. Your real parents are those who raise you. ‘Adopted’ should not be a prefix. I’m saying this because I’ve noticed they always separate children in those categories when naming them.
I know of this too, you know.He can walk away, just like the woman can give the child to someone else to raise. However, I am not being sexist here, as he’s is as much of a selfish prick as it would be with the genders the other way around. It takes two to tango, as they say.
Miscarriage is not on purpose, as you just stated. You cannot choose to miscarry. It is a tragic part of nature.
Ok, that is a point, and makes sense.
Urgh. They are not ‘being an ass’. Sure, they are letting themselves get carried away with that natural lust, but it is not evil. Because the man is not penetrated, the man’s body does not change so much. That’s not to say I don’t think lesbians can’t be raped, even if they used a dildo (but you’re kind of bisexual, then). Most men don’t feel pain either, whereas as a woman’s body to needs adjust to something being in there (yes, I know that some woman feel no pain, or have masturbated beforehand, but then you’re a non-virgin anyway). Yes, I know that you can tighten right back up afterwards if you don’t do it again for a while, but it does not change what has happened. I’m not saying that in a sexist way. I’m just saying that sex a big step in life (for men as well) and people treat it as if it is nothing. It can signal a commitment, it can result in the creation of new life, it can make you feel like a different person. Again, I’m not saying that applies to all, but those people who don’t feel even the slightest bit different are in denial.
Again, I never said it was not. Mind you, I tend to judge the severity of a physical or mental violation by how painful it is or what kinds of affects it had on the person’s mind, so I know that does not apply to all.
No, it is hypocrisy. Saying that one man can do all this stuff with you and another suddenly can’t because he’s no that man is hypocrisy because she has already done all that stuff, and it would make no difference doing it again. No, it is hypocrisy. Again, as I said, it makes the trauma no less real, but it is not for those reasons. It is her realising how foolish she was and how she cannot go back to the way things were before (no, not in regards to second partner, but her taking the step too early). She still deserves all the comfort and help she needs. Again, as she made a commitment to someone, as well as violating her, that person is violating her commitment to that person, and if that person were to reject her afterwards, she or he would be almost as bad as the rapist. I say the same for those sick cunts who break up with someone or dump them because they were raped and therefore ‘someone got there first’. That ‘first’ was not her choice. And it was not really a first in the first place, as she did not consent.
Yes, I did, but that person still rushed in too fast, most likely. Some relationships just don’t work out, and that is a sad thing (I mean that truly, as all that love and connections ended up for naught because something happened). If someone wants to date a girl (or a guy) who has been with another, all the power to them, they are strong people, but it still hypocritical to claim cheating, even if it wasn’t the claimer’s fault that the relationship failed, as she already made a commitment to another. All of these people are pretty good examples as well, as well those DA stamps and whatnot. I haven’t had sex with him. It is still be no less sad, but I have not handled my body over to someone else (no, we don’t do the ‘I belong to you and you belong to me’ nonsense).
Yes, people make it in issue, a selfish issues. Incest and rape are not selfish reasons, even if it is still unfair to the new life. There is no hypocrisy or selfishness there.
“I also support it because of equality. Equality for all. And while it is not the reason why, I am also sick of the ‘feminists’ who scream that being anti-abortion is automatically ‘anti-women’no matter what. Another example is a old secondary school friend of mine. She was born at roughly the same time as me (well, I was fourteen weeks early, her a month), and she weighed even less than me, and has/had worse eyesight (well, I was born blind and she could see, but hers became worse than mine from a very young age) and she made it through as well, she did those things as well. Babies are strong. “
While it is good that your friend also made it through, unfortunately not all babies are strong
There are positive outcomes, there are negative outcomes, and each case is individual.
“There would still be ways to live. Everyone deserves a life unless they ruin the life of another. If you have that attitude, what does that say for deafblind children, or children/adults who cannot look after themselves at all (due to a mental condition or underdevelopment). And even when it comes to criminals, I still think they deserve the right to books and art (my government recently tried to ban both). It sounds cheesy, these stories, I know, but real life can be like that sometimes.”
If I were talking about being simply blind alone, or deaf alone, it wouldn’t be so much of an issue. But blind as well as deaf? As well as being unable to walk? How much disability can an individual put up with? What if the kid was going to get cancer and would have a short life with nothing but pain?
“Well, then that would be her fault, and if that were the situation, I would hope I was given a better home. Yes, abuse is disgusting no matter what, but many people have risen above such a thing.
Again, they chose to have sex. The intelligent and most responsible thing would be to do that, but I know not everyone can resist lust. She is just selfish if she tries to get rid of it if or when it happens.”
It is far less selfish to stop something born before it can even feel pain than to bring a life into the world where it will know nothing but. She shouldn’t have gotten pregnant yes, but sometimes abortion is a kinder alternative.
“Of course I do. And while I know I cannot help them all, if I can at least give one, or two (I would still feel horrible about the children I’ve left behind) a good, loving home, I will had made some difference, even if it is so insignificant and will make no difference over all. It is because people are too selfish to adopt. Yes, you are free to have children the biological way, but I just wish people would consider adopting more. And besides, what’s to stop someone having a child biologically and from adoption. They are just as much your children. Your real parents are those who raise you. ‘Adopted’ should not be a prefix. I’m saying this because I’ve noticed they always separate children in those categories when naming them.”
This is true.
“Miscarriage is not on purpose, as you just stated. You cannot choose to miscarry. It is a tragic part of nature.”
Point being just because something is natural does not always make it so great. Caesareans are sometimes done to save the life of a baby. Are they natural?
“Urgh. They are not ‘being an ass’. Sure, they are letting themselves get carried away with that natural lust, but it is not evil.”
Okay, harassment is not “evil evil” but it’s still bad. A person can be sued if they do that. Besides, you don’t want someone you don’t care for deciding to try copping a feel from you, do you?
“Because the man is not penetrated, the man’s body does not change so much. That’s not to say I don’t think lesbians can’t be raped, even if they used a dildo (but you’re kind of bisexual, then).”
…..Rape however is evil.
“Most men don’t feel pain either, whereas as a woman’s body to needs adjust to something being in there (yes, I know that some woman feel no pain, or have masturbated beforehand, but then you’re a non-virgin anyway). Yes, I know that you can tighten right back up afterwards if you don’t do it again for a while, but it does not change what has happened. I’m not saying that in a sexist way. I’m just saying that sex a big step in life (for men as well) and people treat it as if it is nothing. It can signal a commitment, it can result in the creation of new life, it can make you feel like a different person. Again, I’m not saying that applies to all, but those people who don’t feel even the slightest bit different are in denial.”
Why does this “change” matter in regards to harassment or rape?
“Again, I never said it was not. Mind you, I tend to judge the severity of a physical or mental violation by how painful it is or what kinds of affects it had on the person’s mind, so I know that does not apply to all.”
While there are different situations that should be treated differently, this can get abused.
“No, it is hypocrisy. Saying that one man can do all this stuff with you and another suddenly can’t because he’s no that man is hypocrisy because she has already done all that stuff, and it would make no difference doing it again. No, it is hypocrisy. Again, as I said, it makes the trauma no less real, but it is not for those reasons. It is her realising how foolish she was and how she cannot go back to the way things were before (no, not in regards to second partner, but her taking the step too early).”
I do not think that is what her problem would be. That is what your problem is, and yours alone because for some reason you’re placing a lot of value into being a virgin and whether a person is rushing into a sex or not, it shouldn’t matter. No-one cares except for the odd religious nut. You know why? A woman’s body is her own. It is not hypocrisy to complain about getting raped, because what she did was never wrong in the first place, because it’s her body, and her right to do with it what she wants. She could be the next Paris Hilton but it would still be her body and her right.
For some reason you really “dislike” this change from having sex or think it is really immoral. Yeah, there might be a difference afterwards, but it’s not bad thing. You think it’s so bad, life after sex, and that the way things “were before” is so much better? I think you’re afraid of change, or at least that change. And for what? What do you THINK would happen if, for some odd reason, you did have consensual sex? I know you’re asexual, but say someone slipped you an aphrodisiac. You had an operation on your brain, whatever, just flex your imagination a bit. Humour me. You did it, the next morning, you go to the doctor, and you caught nothing after some tests. You didn’t become pregnant. What then? What different sort of person would you become?
“She still deserves all the comfort and help she needs. “
Yes she does.
“Again, as she made a commitment to someone, as well as violating her, that person is violating her commitment to that person, and if that person were to reject her afterwards, she or he would be almost as bad as the rapist. I say the same for those sick cunts who break up with someone or dump them because they were raped and therefore ‘someone got there first’. That ‘first’ was not her choice. And it was not really a first in the first place, as she did not consent.”
It would be wrong.
“Yes, I did, but that person still rushed in too fast, most likely. Some relationships just don’t work out, and that is a sad thing (I mean that truly, as all that love and connections ended up for naught because something happened). If someone wants to date a girl (or a guy) who has been with another, all the power to them, they are strong people, but it still hypocritical to claim cheating, even if it wasn’t the claimer’s fault that the relationship failed, as she already made a commitment to another. “
Cheating is bad not because it’s hypocritical, it’s bad because your partner wants you to love him or her. A person might have not had any partners before. Like you, you might not have had any partner before your BF. But if you went out and kissed someone while you agreed to be with him, you’d be cheating. If he went out and kissed a girl at the moment, he’d be cheating on you. If you however kissed someone before you even knew your BF, it wouldn’t be cheating. If you kiss your BF, you’re not cheating on your previous partner, because it would be over between you and that person. On the odd chance you have cheated on your BF, if he decided to kiss someone, he’s still be wrong, as he would be no better than you, (but you would also be in the wrong in the first place). If there is one thing that is hypocritical in this world, it is revenge.
“I haven’t had sex with him. It is still be no less sad, but I have not handled my body over to someone else (no, we don’t do the ‘I belong to you and you belong to me’ nonsense).”
I also forgot to mention a bit in regards to pregnancy - what if my allergies or conditions were to be passed down as well? I know they say it's fifty percent, but it's still fifty percent. If my child had those conditions, it would be all my fault. Yes, that child might be able to live life normally despite them, but I would still feel guilty that they had them.
Oh, silly me there. I meant to say that I/she was born fourteen weeks/a month early. No child could survive that early. Yes, you are right, and if those negative things happen, that is life, and we must mourn. However, even babies have the survival instinct. Ok, it seems to only manifest as 'if I make enough noise, someone will help me', but a sick infant will still want to survive. Ah, I saw a documentary about those twins. At least the parents gave them the chance. There is always exceptions.
We have charities over here for deafblind children. They can learn braille, explore the world through touch, have sensory toys. Those people can still enjoy life even if they cannot look after themselves. If they want to, on their own terms, die because it is too much for them, that is a whole different topic, but it is the decision and thoughts of the that person and that person alone who decides whether he or she likes his or her life.
Again, it is the person's choice whether their live is good or not.
I'm glad you think so.
But a C-section is not selfish, as you stated. Yes, we can all be selfish at times, but there is a level limit. For example, wishing to entertain ourselves, and asking for books, or technology, or whatever resources for it can be considered selfish. And there is always the survival instinct again, which can appear in negative ways. Yes, we thankfully have people who are dedicated to saving the life of others, but if a situation is really dire, we most likely will do anything we can to preserve ourselves.
Of course.
Again, of course.
She can just ignored it.
No, no, as I said to another person, you can be in a heterosexual, sexually-active relationship and still be feminist. Most married women are non-virigins, I know it is rare to become pregnant on the first attempt, etc. There is just a difference between 'meaningful sex' and 'throwing yourself at someone because you are letting lust control you'. I place a value on it in regards to romance and marriage because it makes sense. Again, people assume it for religious reasons. That's not the only reason, I've shown and observed. It is not fully 'her body' if she has given herself to another. Virgins have someone to lose (no, I am not saying rape is bad for the loss of virginity, but the heinous crime of someone taking and violating her body). A heterosexually non-virgin female does not have anything to violate unless she is engaged or married. She can sleep with as many or as few people she wants, but that does mean she can deny people the right to avoid her or have an opinion on her.
No, I don't think it's bad. I'm just saying there is some kind of change, no matter how small, and I (and I'm not the only one) just wishes people would be more careful and realize that it can only happen once. You can only give that gift to one person. And most people don't want it for 'religious' reasons. Well, I would be a mother. I would not let that define me as a woman, but I know I would do my damnest to make sure they have a good life. The bit I would be terrified over would be the childbirth. I know it is natural, but I would also worry this tiny body of mine could not take it (I don't think I'm 'weak' as that is anti-feminist, as I am will fight and protect myself if needed), but that, along with the shit my mother went through with both me and my brother, doesn't exactly give me confidence, and she's of average height and no medical conditions to speak of. I would get a C-section. And I would hope Matt would be there to help. I know he would not abandon me.
Again, of course. It would be disgusting. Not to mention it just piles on to the suffering the victim already had. And not forgetting how much courage and trust it takes for someone to confess such a thing.
Well, I would not, as I respect him. Oh, I should say, I do not think sex is the ultimate commitment, as I hope implied (but implied the former there). No, it just because someone is 'in the past' it does not chance the fact that it happened it. That relationship failed, therefore, making what happened in it pointless. Yes, I believe former partners can be friends, but how can you be friends with someone you slept with? That is why I did not understand the whole 'friends with benefits' thing. You have been so very, very, close with that person. Yes, that second, or third (after that, you're just getting desperate), can be your 'one' (I do naively wish that our first adult relationships can be our 'ones', but life is cruel) but that person still cannot claim cheating. I in fact dislike those people who think 'we haven't done anything yet, he/she must not love me!', and I'm guessing I'm not the only one in that regard? But that's another thing casual sex has let to.
Well, as you said, I suppose the kissing would count.
“Oh, silly me there. I meant to say that I/she was born fourteen weeks/a month early. No child could survive that early. Yes, you are right, and if those negative things happen, that is life, and we must mourn. However, even babies have the survival instinct. Ok, it seems to only manifest as 'if I make enough noise, someone will help me', but a sick infant will still want to survive. Ah, I saw a documentary about those twins. At least the parents gave them the chance. There is always exceptions.
We have charities over here for deafblind children. They can learn braille, explore the world through touch, have sensory toys. Those people can still enjoy life even if they cannot look after themselves. If they want to, on their own terms, die because it is too much for them, that is a whole different topic, but it is the decision and thoughts of the that person and that person alone who decides whether he or she likes her life.
Again, it is the person's choice whether their live is good or not”
Yes, it is that person’s decision. Although in cases where someone severely ill and is also incompetent, and there is not much hope for the person recovering, and their decision to continue living or continue suffering is unknown, the decision to end a life is left up to the family. In the case of an unborn child, it is best left up to the mother, which would be the said family.
“But a C-section is not selfish, as you stated. Yes, we can all be selfish at times, but there is a level limit. For example, wishing to entertain ourselves, and asking for books, or technology, or whatever resources for it can be considered selfish. And there is always the survival instinct again, which can appear in negative ways. Yes, we thankfully have people who are dedicated to saving the life of others, but if a situation is really dire, we most likely will do anything we can to preserve ourselves.”
Yet you believe abortion is selfish. Yet it isn’t selfish if you want to stop or prevent someone suffering.
Murder is wrong and selfish. Ending a life in the case of euthanasia or self-defence, is not.
“She can just ignored it.”
And if someone off the street decided to try feeling your boobs, are you going to ignore it and let him continue?
“No, no, as I said to another person, you can be in a heterosexual, sexually-active relationship and still be feminist. Most married women are non-virigins, I know it is rare to become pregnant on the first attempt, etc. There is just a difference between 'meaningful sex' and 'throwing yourself at someone because you are letting lust control you'.”
There is also a lot of grey area in between.
“I place a value on it in regards to romance and marriage because it makes sense. Again, people assume it for religious reasons. That's not the only reason, I've shown and observed. It is not fully 'her body' if she has given herself to another. Virgins have someone to lose (no, I am not saying rape is bad for the loss of virginity, but the heinous crime of someone taking and violating her body). A heterosexually non-virgin female does not have anything to violate unless she is engaged or married. She can sleep with as many or as few people she wants, but that does mean she can deny people the right to avoid her or have an opinion on her.”
She does have something she has lost, same as a virgin, as you described above “the heinous crime of someone taking and violating her body” but why do you think this doesn’t happen to non-virgins?
Why do you think “it is not fully her body” and that “it’s given to another” so completely?
What evidence can you provide that a woman does, would or should have her rights to her own body lost, that any sort of enslavement, either physical, mental or otherwise, starts the moment she has any sort of sexual activity, whether in a commitment or outside of one?
“No, I don't think it's bad. I'm just saying there is some kind of change, no matter how small, and I (and I'm not the only one) just wishes people would be more careful and realize that it can only happen once. You can only give that gift to one person. And most people don't want it for 'religious' reasons.”
Yes, but to believe the change is so severe that it’s hypocrisy when a non-virgin complains about rape?
“Well, I would be a mother. I would not let that define me as a woman, but I know I would do my damnest to make sure they have a good life. The bit I would be terrified over would be the childbirth. I know it unnatural, but I would also worry this tiny body of mine could not take it (I don't think I'm 'weak' as that is anti-feminist, as I am will fight and protect myself if needed), but that, along with the shit my mother went through with both me and my brother, doesn't exactly give me confidence, and she's of average height and no medical conditions to speak of. I would get a C-section. And I would hope Matt would be there to help. I know he would not abandon me.”
Yes, but what if you HAD sex, but DIDN’T become pregnant? Next day, go to doctor, no STD’s, no pregnancy. What would happen to you, do you think?
“Again, of course. It would be disgusting. Not to mention it just piles on to the suffering the victim already had. And not forgetting how much courage and trust it takes for someone to confess such a thing.”
Indeed
“Oh, I should say, I do not think sex is the ultimate commitment, as I hope implied (but implied the former there).
No, it just because someone is 'in the past' it does not chance the fact that it happened it. That relationship failed, therefore, making what happened in it pointless.”
I’m not saying former relationships end up being pointless or that it never happened. I’m saying what a person does in previous relationships doesn’t have any bearing on future ones in regards to cheating.
“Yes, I believe former partners can be friends, but how can you be friends with someone you slept with? That is why I did not understand the whole 'friends with benefits' thing. You have been so very, very, close with that person. Yes, that second, or third (after that, you're just getting desperate), can be your 'one' (I do naively wish that our first adult relationships can be our 'ones', but life is cruel) but that person still cannot claim cheating.”
I guess you’d have to ask someone who has slept with someone for that. It does happen though and it simply doesn’t affect other people the same it does with others.
“I in fact dislike those people who think 'we haven't done anything yet, he/she must not love me!', and I'm guessing I'm not the only one in that regard? But that's another thing casual sex has let to.”
You’re the only person I know of that considers what a person does before a relationship qualifies as cheating.
Why do you dislike them?
“Well, as you said, I suppose the kissing would count.”
Yep.
“I also forgot to mention a bit in regards to pregnancy - what if my allergies or conditions were to be passed down as well? I know they say it's fifty percent, but it's still fifty percent. If my child had those conditions, it would be all my fault. Yes, that child might be able to live life normally despite them, but I would still feel guilty that they had them.”
I dread the thought of having a child myself. It’s times like that I consider getting my tubes tied. But I’m forever alone anyway so why worry? But I asked you to stretch your imagination, so I’ll stretch mine in return.
If I had a child that had the same problems that I or my family has, or I passed on some disability, I’d have to live with that guilt. It would eat away it me, I guess, but there will be ways in life to deal with that guilt. In guess one way would be to channel it into helping the child cope with whatever problem it gets. If the guilt got too severe, I would have to seek help as I would not only have to look after my own well-being but the well-being of the kid who would depend on me, and I would have to realise this.
For the first one, yes. However, just out of curiosity, what is your opinion in regards to comas? Or permanent comas? It is true in some cases that the person can hear. No. That child has yet to even begins its life. It deserves a chance, not to be murdered by some heartless cow. The father, if willing, can take the child, or again, it can be given to another family. Just as the mother can keep the child if the father is a heartless bastard.
But again, you don’t know if that person will suffer. And that person who wants to end that life again was a foetus once. Euthanasia is the choice of the person wishing it unless they cannot give consent, then indeed it is the choice of the family. That foetus has yet to begin life in the real world. Again, unless the pregnancy could cause the mother’s death, or it was the result of rape, there is no reason to abort.
That is different. That is physical. Words from a stranger who knows nothing of you can be ignored.
Because she already gave herself to someone. Yes, she will suffer physically because that attacker obviously cares nothing for her, or sometimes, does not know what they are doing (it can happen, but the attacker would still be at fault), but she is not losing anything physically. Well, because sex, for women, tends to be more about emotions than physical thing (again, women who can be completely without emotions is a cold being), and due to the way sex works, she be very open and exposed to her partner, male or female. It is not slavery within commitment. Yes, I know sex is about lust, but again, it can be romantic in a committed relationship. But again, casual sex, swingers, BDSM, exist.
It’s not ‘severe’, that’s too harsh a word. Again, she already let another take he, and there being another, unless she is engaged or married, makes no difference in the long run. Her mind however, is a different matter, as we know.
Well, I’d probably just think “Well, fuck.” As then I would to give myself those names and insults. I’m good at insulting myself, after all.
Well, it does to some people, including me. Some people (not for religious reasons) think that sex outside of marriage, even with the person they are going to marry is betraying their future husband/wife (or only husband, because we all know lesbians are just trying to get attention -_-) or not being the strength and respect to wait until they are wed. I’m not that extreme, especially in regards to the ‘with the same person part’ and the fiancé/fiance is just as guilty for that last part as well. Some people just don’t like someone having a ‘sexual past’ to thin about. And no, it’s not because they ‘worry they might not be good enough’, unlike most ‘feminists’ say (I’m not saying you think this, I’m just giving an example of such attitudes again). But other people are free to view such things however they like. To have our own opinions, no matter what, is a form of equality.
Again, I don’t dislike them. I don’t like the attitude and selfishness.
:Nod: .
Forever alone? Now, now, why would you say that? As sappy, pathetic, and naïve as this sounds, you will find someone. Yes, I dread to think that there are people who have existed that, no matter how much they tried, never found that speical someone, but no-one deserves to die alone. No-one. For some reason, I can even extend that to the lowest and sickest of criminals. Seeing their loved ones, if they have any, might just make them think before they lose cognitive thinking, die and go to hell. That’s a sick thing right? To think that they deserve someone so…kind. Don’t give up, please. …
Eh, um, sorry . I just get a little carried away when people have this opinion of themselves, given that I’m a pessimist. We don’t need more of our kind. People of that mind set are an expatriating lot.
Ah, so I could use my experiences to help them? How logical (not sarcsasm). I mean sure, they could be a whiney little, “But you’re not me! You don’t understaaaannnddd!” but I would do my best to dispel that attitude. But of course. I would never want to be in a situation where I could not look after them. Also, as…old fashioned, maybe a little anti-feminist as this sounds, if I could raise a child, adopted or biological, I will made another achievement – I would add to the people who prove that disabilities does not mean one cannot be a good parent.
But that’s a long, long time away, after lots of training and confidence building.
Sta.sh
Heterosexually/dildo non-virgin females are the biggest hypocrite on the planet anyway. They came to feminists, but are slaves to primitive urges and service men, they claim disgust at other people's sexual activities, but touched and let a guy stick his penis inside them/violated themselves. They claim a man 'cheated' on them, when they let another men put his penis inside them, and that man had the kindness to forgive her. And it goes on.
Devious Comments
I see you are wrongly informed on the seriousness of the situation when it comes to define sex, gender, and sexuality
Your opinion is archaic and so masochistic (Even my grandma is more progressive), I respect your opinion, but why to be a devil's advicate
I am not a masochist. I do not take pleasure in anyone suffering. I would not give to charity and enjoy helping others if I did not. I would not be polite, were I so. I am perfectly progressive, as you would see if you bothered to read my later comments. I am fighting for men's rights too, like a feminist; I know that, nowadays, men are far more oppressed than women. I am stating biological facts. I formed my view through my education in reproduction classes (we do have ‘sex ed’ over here, we look at intelligently, in the biological manner, though we still learn about STDs, transgenderism and whatnot). I have known about sex and reproduction for fourteen, almost fifteen, years. as I, unlike most ‘feminists’ (once again I must say this), as I do not scream about how supporting abortion is ‘anti-women’ while turning around and saying men, even the fathers, do not deserve opinions on the life of their own child. No one cares about them having mental breakdowns. Everyone only cares about the selfish bitch who decided to get fucked and doesn’t to be responsible for the life she once were. I do not shame men’s sexuality. I do not think a man is ‘objectifying’ women by looking at them sexually, or enjoying porn, or that it is wrong for them to look a woman sexuality when she is wearing clothing meant to display the body in a sexual manner’, while they weakly fawn over men’s muscles and butts. Female who let men fuck them (as in ‘for pleasure’) are not feminists. They can do that all they like, granted, but they are hypocrites and liars to claim they are feminists when they have objectified themselves. They are anything but ‘liberated’. I am truly liberated, as I am free from slavery to lust and letting men rule me. How the hell can a woman be a ‘feminist’ or ‘liberated’ by letting men trust into her most intimate areas, taking her as a receptacle (however, again, unlike most ‘feminists’ I see nothing wrong with a man who does that, or virgin/asexual men).
Saying there is a ‘double standard’ is like saying men having penises and testicles, and women having vaginas and wombs, is ‘sexist’ or a ‘double standard’. Further biology that shows that women are not meant to be promiscuous is that they can only be pregnant by one man at a time. Not to mention, the initiate to seek out a mate with the best genes for their children, hence why most women have a lower sex drive.
Funny, your Grandmother will have most likely been a Second-Wave Feminist, not this bullshit ‘third wave’ (AKA Feminazaism, where all women are perfect angels free of judgement for their choices, or you are a misogynistic pig, but they can say what they like about men).
Finally, I am not playing Devil’s Abdicate. I am simply stating my views as I am free to do in a world of equality.
Let's make an analysis, on the theory that men are more oppressed than women nowadays
Points in your favor are that men receive higher punishments than women for the same crimes and ways they have done them, men have to be within a military selective service system (as in the US) or doing mandatory military service while women do not (With some exceptions like Israel, Brunei, etc.), and when it comes to divorce, the custody of children will go more to women than men.
As a man, I feel that men suffer from socially imposed definitions of masculinity that does not recognize the real and unique nature of male individuals. Stereotypes include for men to be sexually virile, aggressive, overtly-competitive, and tough at the face of life and taking the initiative in many aspects, from politics to the starting of sexual relations
The pitfall of your theory is that women continue to suffer under the clutches of patriarchal values (this is a fact in developing countries), Gender equality is of vital importance for these countries as such archaic ideals of gender are damaging the fair, egalitarian, and stable progress. There are two points for gender equality:
The first is to acknowledge the physical difference women and men have between each other (men have a penis and women have a vagina) as this is a real fact, unless nature surprise us. another physical difference is when we describe strength levels (men being stronger due to their their more developed muscles, women being more flexible due to their more developed ligaments) where both are powerful on their own right, none overpowering the other.
The second is to acknowledge that there are many practices that damage men and women by their society as they define their sexuality and gender roles (men are the perverts and the leaders while women being the virgins and followers). this is where the real problem lies.
Coming back to the issues in developed countries like the UK and US, women's rights have improved, therefore feeling a sense of accomplishment for having a gender-equal society. That is a lie
When it comes to gender ideals, there are still problems. Men are still socially-required to be tough and virile while women to be kind and protective to their sexual integrity. in the case of gender roles, women are still expected to take care of the home and be in charge of the well-being of her family while men are the ones who have to provide to demonstrate their masculinity. that is not fair for any of them. the women cannot be a professional and an individual if she is given the house chores monopoly. For men, the disadvantage is to not be part of the real development of his family, to be supportive and fair.
I study women who draw women in sensual ways, I am so glad these women are against archaic values that say women are not supposed to like sex or sexual media, or another idea would be to be virgins unlit marriage. these women demonstrate that women can be great admirers of the female sexual form. Based on Nielsen, 1/3 of internet porn watchers are women in the US, is that a bad thing, nope, instead, it is positive as former monolith worlds are becoming more open and more inclusive to new audiences and new actors within them.
Gender equality happens when men and women share the same or al least almost the same responsibilities of the home and their development and action in the workforce. it is true there will never be 50/50 of everything, but aiming for more fairness an integration is key for our social progress.
Now, when it comes to the issue of abortion, I believe the decision must go only with the mother if her health is in jeopardy (due to health conditions, violence, incest, and rape). if none of those problems are present, then the decision is for both as it took two to tango. Now, if the girl is a "Selfish bitch", then the guy is either a victim of violation (they exists) or just a dumbass who did not know how to protect himself if the sex was consensual. there are motherfucking men and women out there as well as male and female victims of their plots, this is due to their failure of learning values, no of the nonsense of religion, but values that teach us how to treat each other fairly and respect each other. As of now, that is not a reality yet, but working for it is worth all the wait it needs.
There are selfish women out there but try to see the whole picture, our generation is in a difficult situation, we need to redefine ourselves from horrible terms such as being Materialistic and narcissistic. we need to recognize that we are a mosaic, oven to change its forms in order to create a better artwork.
You have key points, but look at the whole picture, limited views will make you look bad rather than a person who analyses her world
It is never my fashion to insult people, I am reminding you to look at the whole picture, understand the whole possibilities, and to observe the both sides of the story
Ah, ok.
Ok, that is good to read. I agree with and understand those points. The attitudes in regards to masculinity piss me off as much as what is contained in the next paragraph. My boyfriend suffered that quite a bit recently. You know, the typical ‘tiny penis’, ‘only in it because you want sex’, ‘doormat’, ‘faggot’, ‘bitch’, etc. Not to mention, if a woman (such as myself), like feminine men/can’t stand macho/overly muscular men (mainly because I don’t want it look like he is with because I weakly want ‘protection’ or ‘saving’), she is seen as wanting to walk all over him. If the woman is in charge in the relationship (though I do not believe anyone should be ‘in charge’), he is called ‘whipped’, ‘pussy’ (God, I hate that word, especially when it is aimed at men), and ‘mangina’.
There is also the excuses for female-on-male, male-on-male, and, just to cover all of them, female-on-female abuse and rape. I know it is an in intelligent thing, to use TV Tropes, but there is also The Unfair Sex, Bumbling Dad, the shaming of a Distressed Dude, and a few others I cannot recall. However, that is an area in which women suffer just as much. Men are also ignored in regard to eating disorders and in medical health in general (well, in America, in regards to the latter)
Urgh, not the rubbish ‘Teh patriarchy still exists!” rubbish. However, you are right, as it is a bad hard to repute such eloquent language. However, the only areas I can think of where women are oppressed or discriminated is in male-dominated fields, (though the reserve is true as well, of course, particularly in regards to children and intimate examination, where men are forced to have a chaperone, not when the genders are reversed). Along with this (much as I am anti-war/anti-military) military service, in that women are forced to be in the background, behind a desk, as a medic, or using aircraft or sniper rifles, and are completely disallowed from fighting on the front line, so they are not fighting in the first place.
Even more well-known, there is the countries where they are prohibited from driving, getting an education, or even voting.
Finally, we have the video game industry (though that can be added to the media aspect, and men are just as stereotyped), both within games and in the attitudes and mistreatment of women employed there, along with gamers who happen to be female (I dislike the term ‘girl gamer’).
Hm, I didn’t know about the looser ligaments thing. I can’t even touch my toes standing up. I guess it makes sense, though, when you consider childbirth. However, everyone can train to be stronger or more flexible, remember. I myself wish I had more muscle structure.
Again, very true, very true. I notice it most in the American media. Feminine men don’t get stereotyped as gay or wimpy as much over here. Indeed. That is I believe, regards of the genders of the people in the relationship, things such as child-rearing, housework and cooking should be shared. For example, due to my OCD, I am good at tidying and cleaning, though I do not consider it stereotypical. However, I am, well, useless in the kitchen. I can chop food, but that’s it. Mainly because I find cooking to confusing and stressful (I get too worried about being scalded or it burning). The thing about sexual virility baffles me. So, he hasn’t put his penis in some girl’s vagina? And? So? It is bad not only because it pressures men, but has also caused the attitudes that men cannot be raped, sexually harassed, or assaulted, particularly by a woman. I used to think so too (but not because of the ‘men always want sex’ thing, but rather, again, because of the biology difference between men and women), until I just realised, frankly out of nowhere, how anti-Feminist that was. It is because of my father’s treatment of my mother that I fight for male victims of abuse as well, as I said to myself “Well, what if it was your mum who was doing that? Would you say your dad deserved it?”. However, I do not tend to say this, as people tend assume, and refuse to believe otherwise, that that is where I obtained my attitudes in regards to sex. It is either that, or religion, or me being molested/raped, when nothing of the sort has happened (to think so is insulting to real victims of these heinous acts).
It is also, like other things, the opposite to the ancient past. Men who slept around or had too much sex were seen as insulting their virility, particularly in Greece, and it was thought that woman could not say no to sex.
There is nothing wrong with that attitude in regard to female sexuality however (well, female heterosexuality). A woman is ‘interested in sex’ with a man wants nothing more than to be dominated, again, due to the simple biology of it and the penetrator-penetrated relationship. The attitude of virginity to marriage is understandable too, for the reasons I have previously mentioned, and that no self-respecting man or woman would want to marry a woman who has already been disloyal to him or her.
Once again, you are correct there. There is nothing more I can say really.
Ok, again, I agree for the most part, but if the woman knew her health might endanger her if she became pregnant, the logical choice is to not have sex, and not take on the possibility of it occurring. For example, yes, I am not interested in sex in the slightest, but I also do not think this tiny body, with its conditions, could cope with pregnancy. I fear for a repeat of my own turbulent birth and aftermath and my mother was perfectly healthy.
It is not the man’s fault. It is the woman who let him inside her without ‘protection’ (that is another thing that sickens me, that we must ‘protect’ from, or that sex is ‘safe’ when the natural occurrence, which I know does not happen every time, is being activity prevented). Or it is both. However, if a woman is willing to have a man thrust inside her, then she is perfectly capable of handling pregnancy, which does not involve one being as vulnerable, as open and exposed.
However, I am glad that you agree men should have as much say. However, those people that call that tiny life a ‘clump of cells’ a ‘parasite’ (even though the definition of parasite states that it is a being of another species and technically, we are all parasites, as we require other living things for substance), a ‘mistake’. That is the biggest form of hypocrisy one can do. We were all those ‘clumps of cells’ once. Sperm and eggs are living things, cells are living things, so foetuses are living things. It makes simply existing a punishable offence, just because it is ‘inconvenient’. It insults that person, their mother, their father, and the whole of humanity. And what does it say about the ‘kept’ children? I’m sure they will enjoy the lovely story of how they selfishly murdered their older brother(s)/sister(s).
If a person falls for someone’s ‘ploy’ for sex, they have no reason to complain, for they were stupid enough to fall for it. It is not ‘victim-blaming’ it is called taking responsibility, and a little intelligence. And if they were a (heterosexual female) non-virgin before it happened, that becomes even less, as she is already been penetrated, so another penis or object makes no difference.
As for respect, again, indeed. I am a very cynical person, but I still believe in the goodness and decency of people. I’ve seen and read the wonderful things we can do, and I’m certain, I hope, that is greater than the horrid things we do. Sadly, such attitudes as racism, homophobia, transphobia, etc will never cease, as there will always be one intolerant who will past it down to either their children or someone else’s, and those children will continue the chain. However, we can still reduce it as much as possible, as well, our world has changed so much.
I shall do my best then, um…good sir?
I find quite interesting your following excerpts:
"The attitude of virginity to marriage is understandable too, for the reasons I have previously mentioned, and that no self-respecting man or woman would want to marry a woman who has already been disloyal to him or her".
If no self-respecting men and women should marry a non-virgin woman, then I guess you will not have any problems when it comes for self-respecting women to not marry non-virgin men, right?
The concept of virginity is as fictitious as Aesop fables, society constructed this idea in order to limit women's choices and liberties, whereas men did not have such a value and could do whatever they wanted sexually. I know there are physical comparisons when it comes to virginity, such as the penetration of the Hymen. But since when a membrane became the epicenter for a moral-ethical issue that endured for so many centuries? why did we put so much importance on something so common when it comes to define the "sexual Validity" of women.
I am sure you will not agree with this idea, and I respect if some women wish to be virgins until marriage, but it will be unethical of me to support a system where inequalities get in the way. Either both men and women stay "pure" before marriage, or none
the next excerpt
"If a person falls for someone’s ‘ploy’ for sex, they have no reason to complain, for they were stupid enough to fall for it. It is not ‘victim-blaming’ it is called taking responsibility, and a little intelligence. And if they were a (heterosexual female) non-virgin before it happened, that becomes even less, as she is already been penetrated, so another penis or object makes no difference".
My dear, rape is rape, there is no excuse or justification for it. Again coming with the issue of virginity, if a "non-virgin" woman was raped, are you suggesting it does not matter? That not only goes against gender equality, that goes against the most basic forms of human rights. Nothing justifies rape, nothing. We need to wake up as a society to understand better the situation, support the victims (whether male or female) and punish the perpetrators (either male or female). I am not talking about feminism, I am talking about basic social justice.
Also I see you are phallocentric in your principles when you describe sexuality, the penetrator-penetrated divide. I am a person who believes that both men and women have wonderful sexualities, none is better that the other. Such a divide does not even go with natural laws. It is proven that many female animals, such as chimps and wolves (my favorite animals) are promiscuous and even practice homosexual relationships. However they end up giving birth to the next generations as both males and females are adapted by evolution to do so.
We humans, we set ourselves free from natural social laws since we came down from the branches. Our sexual nature is more evolved and developed than the rest of the animal kingdom combined. why limit our sexual nature to the Penetrator-Penetrated divide?
Women and men are different in their physical sex, but both want to feel their sexualities in ways not limited to its reproductive and limited role. Having a sense of our sexuality is a human right, part of our human nature
“ There is no ‘sexual double standard’ as sex is biologically, physically and most times, emotionally different for men and women. Men need sexual release. The whole ‘blue balls’ thing is very true, and sometimes, masturbation just will not do it. Women have nothing to keep in check, no good reason to have pointless pleasure sex. Women are penetrated, the submissive, the bottom, the uke, the receiver. Men are the penetrators, the dominators, the seme, the takers. Unless it is rape, a woman cannot ‘fuck’ or ‘dominate’ a man.”
There is no difference between a virgin and non-virgin heterosexual male (that is not to say I consider homosexual non-virgins as lesser), whereas, again, there is a big difference with women (see below)
It is an insult to marriage, a non-virgin woman claiming she is loyal, and then turning around and screaming and beating her husband for ‘cheating’. Again, it is about loyality and commitment. It’s not like I’m the only person who thinks it. And there is nothing wrong with those who do. Freud is overrated and spouted mostly rubbish (I get the feeling you might refer to the ‘Madonna-Whore Complex’ – it is nothing more than a man respecting himself, women, and the concepts of romance and marriage. It is not ‘in equal’, due to, again, the italic statement. Again, that’s not to say that all things of old should stay and be, but this, this is logical.
I’m sorry, but I think marriage should be between two people and two people alone (that goes for both heterosexual and homosexual couples). That is not to say non-virgins should be banned from marriage, or that my opinion matters to them, but it is just how I feel, due to how big a commitment it is. Even then, we still have if I remember correctly, about fifty percent of marriages ending in divorce? Most is which is by women It’s just…sad. You go through that ceremony and celebration, only for it you and your spouse to fall apart down the line.
Urgh again. Virginity is real. It has existed since the dawn of humanity, and it always will. Virgin – has not took part in sexual activity. The difference between a virgin and non-virgin woman is that a virgin has not been penetrated, be it by anything. Are you saying there is no difference between woman who is free of sexual slavery and one who is not? It has nothing to do with the hymen, I understand.
Again, I refer you to the above in italics. What ‘freedoms’ and ‘choices’? The freedom to be fucked by every man she fancies? The ‘freedom’ to be a slave to sex? At least, in lesbian/gay male intercourse, things are rather more equal due to both participants being the same gender. They are free to have sex with men as much as they like, they just cannot claim to be feminists. It’s not just I’d try to someone making that choice. It’s not for me to do, and it would be a waste of my time. However, there is nothing ‘oppressive’ or ‘sexist’ or ‘misogynistic’ about having an opinon on one’s choice. If someone were to insult me for my choices, that’s their choice, and yes, I might be offended, but they still have the right to do so. There is even disgusting people who think ‘slut’ is ‘the word in the English language and calling a woman a ‘slut’ is ‘the worst thing you can do to a woman’. Really, so the word is worse than Nigger? Faggot? Homophobic and racial slurs? Words that demean and insult the disabled? And using the word slut against a woman is worse than rape or abuse?
Speaking of which, I’ve said before, saying you can rape a (willing) non-virgin female is liken saying you are eating the same meal if you vomit it up and eat the vomit. It’s a strange analogy, I know, but I don’t know how else to put it. It just comes down to hypocrisy. We are all hypocrites in some matter. The rest, I agree with. The rest, however, I again agree with.
However, I must also say, I do think only virgin/lesbian women can be feminists. Mothers are non-virgins, married woman are mostly non-virgins, (sadly) rape victims are technically non-virgin, though not in the mental sense, as they did not consent, if you get what I mean. It would be cruel to say they are.
Yes, it is phallocentric, but only because, well, heterosexual intercourse is phallocentric. It’s not a bad thing. It’s just the what it works.
In regards to chimps, I know that, but the difference is our greater development. We have the intelligence to stick with one mate if we want, something few animal species do. Yes, animals do have some form of romance in their mating rituals, but again, most go their separate ways after the…main action.
The bit about homosexuality is good, though. It is one guarantied prove that homosexuality is natural
Everyone is free to explore their sexuality as much as they wish, but also understand that, while no one can stop them doing what they do, as it’s their choice, it will not stop people having an opinon on it.
Not because men have a penis it means they will always dominate, that's justifying their supremacy
The main ethical value our world needs to understand is that both genders must not overpower the other
Biology is one thing, but you are not getting the emotional/psychological aspect. Women have the right to practice their sexuality just as men do. we are the same species after all, all humans need some form of intimacy. However I respect asexuals if they do not want to do it as that is their choice.
Now, when I mean that women have the right to practice her sexuality, they do it in their own terms, at their own liking
Don't you think that it is unfair for one sex to be sexuality free while the other condemned?
In the 1950s I am sure many men would truly agreed with you as their women were put in the kitchen
Virginity is real if you make it real, my problem with virginity is that it is stupidly used as a way to judge and rate women and that has no logical sense.
we as humans have proved we are capable to change and improve technologies and infrastructures, but not our society and our sexuality
Again, if you want to be a gender equalist, you have to understand that no gender cannot overpower the other. Believing that men are the dominators, simply brings the idea that you are a misogynist who believes in the supremacy of men over women.
Even if virginity is real, using it to bring worth on women is simply backward, insulting, and truly ignorant
Now in the case of rape, how do you know if these "non-virgins" are willing? I think it is unfair to overlook that situation. Rape is rape by Christ's sake, that is a crime and a human rights violation. Again, you are justifying rape
Let's say a "good, pure, and virgin" girl was raped, she lost her "virginity" by a motherfucker, no longer being a "virgin". Now, based on your reasoning, that is an issue we truly need to fix and bring justice, but justice to whom, the victim who really needs it or because her virginity was stolen?
You principle is justifying that women can become worthless beings while the perpetrators cannot be morally condemned.
The real sadness comes from the fact that the victim suffered a heinous crime, and as a society we have the responsibility to address and fix the problem.
I did not think any gender should be ‘supreme’ anyway, or in anything. Yes, as you said, we will never reach a solid fifty-fifty in any form of employment, or actives, but again, we and only hope and encourage.
Here we go. ‘Intimacy’ does not equal sex. You can have a perfectly romantic relationship without out, which you to seem to know from the asexual comment. Casual sex is not very ‘intimate’ or loving, is it?
Again, yes, they should, but should understand that just like they are so quick to judge men, they will be judged as well. Everyone judges and everyone is judged. I know I’m not some innocent, perfect little angel.
Virginity is real because it exists. There is a physical difference between a woman who has had a dildo or penis up there/fingered/been fingered and one who hasn’t. I’ m sure there are mental changes in men, as, again, the physical difference is next to non-existent. And there is nothing wrong with that. Sex is a big change in life and it is treated so nonchalantly nowadays. It used to be such a commitment.
Yes, it is sad.
See above, please.
They are non-virgins. For them to say they are ‘unwilling’ is them being hypocritical. They have already been penetrated. You can’t pick and choose what parts of sex you want and what you don’t (like pregnancy, for example), the whole ‘having boundries’ bullshit. There is no ‘boundaries’ if you are willing to do that. You’re either a sexual woman, and therefore open to all sexual things, since you are will to be so open and exposed, or you are not. The only in-between is if you did to get pregnant.
The fact that she suffered a heinous crime, obviously. Some monster took her body and used them, violated them, humiliated and destroyed them mentally.
Of course, for all genders and orientations.
I am not sure you understand the difference between consenting sex and rape. Rape is almost inherently physically painful, not even to breach the psychological aspects. When a woman is consenting, she becomes "turned on" and her vagina lubricates itself in preparation for sex. This is what makes foreplay so important. It gives the vagina time to self-lubricate and prevent pain and damage from sex due to the rubbing that comes from having sex.
When a woman is raped, she is almost certainly not "turned on" and the last thing her body is prepared to do is lubricate the vagina. Without the lubrication, sex is incredibly painful for the woman by the rubbing of the condom most rapists wear to prevent DNA evidence. The man will not feel pain, but for the woman it would be almost unbearable, especially as it has been proven that female genitalia has upwards of 8,000 nerves while the male genitalia has roughly 4,000.
So you see, the experiences are completely different! To make an analogy: (Consenting sex) you are in a boxing ring and are punched in the face while wearing a face guard by someone who doesn't want to seriously hurt you and whose fist is covered in a glove. (Rape) You are in the ring without any protective gear, being punched in the face by someone who does want to seriously hurt/kill you whose fist is not in a glove but wearing brass knuckles. It is not the same scenario in the least.
Your comment, using the analogy would go like this: "They are boxers. For them to say they "didn't want to be punched in the face" is them being hypocritical. They were already punched while in the ring (where there is protective gear and medical staff nearby). You can't pick and choose what parts of the sport you want (like the protection) and what you don't (like having your jaw dislocated because you weren't wearing a guard, for example), the whole 'having boundries' bullshit."
In short, rape isn't a horrible crime because of virginity, but because of pain. I'm trying to think of another analogy, but it is still very similar to the boxer one. Let's use this instead: a virgin is shot in the leg in a drive-by. Her non-virgin friend was also shot in the leg. Both are in pain, both could die, both were victims. Is the virgin being shot a greater tragedy than the non-virgin? Is her suffering inherently more agonizing than her friend's?
(I intended this reply to be much shorter, but it was more difficult to explain than I thought.)
"No. I don’t think men are supreme in any area, bar heterosexual intercourse. In there, they are the kings and women the servants."
How can you say that men cannot be supreme in any area, albeit heterosexual sex? that is not coherent, is not that a form of "symbolical slavery" for women?
Let me tell you something, I used to think that, I used to think that men was the giver of pleasure and the main beneficiary while women were there to serve him. However that is not true, women can practice and enjoy their sexuality just as well as men and it does not make them shameful, only archaic and useless ideas (based on bullshit) makes them so.
OK, intimacy does not equal sex, but sex is a form of intimacy as well, it depends on the context and way people understand sex.
Let's say "Virginity" exists, shall the physical side influence the emotional and social sides in order to bring forth the worth of women? the answer will be yes if you are a sex trafficker or a religious fundamentalist. I think it's time for women to focus on more important aspects of their lives rather than centering in protecting something that will not be useful in their lives.
Again and Again, Rape is a crime and a human rights violation, nothing justifies it
Based on your commentary, I see that you support the sexual double standard of the Virgin/Whore. The definition of "willing" in this case is if she desires to have pleasure on her own terms or in an equitable way at least. Not because a women is sexual it will mean she can be treated as an object. Sexuality is an important part of our identity but not the most important one.
Your arguments are quite outdated, I suggest you to look at different perspectives openly and objectively
Yes, it does. And nice job trying to oppress my opinion and pigeon-holding me. I am neither. How the fuck is that ‘sex trafficking’ anyway? I wouldn’t within ten feet of a prostitute. However, I still feel for those forced in that industry (and not the ‘I needed the money!’ idiots).
Yeah, because you anything negative about women’s choice or you ‘misogynistic’/‘sexist’/‘oppressive’, which they insult men and call them rapists and perverts for having a sex drive. Equality means both positive and negative things.
It will to some people. What about physical and biological difference do you not get? Penis, testicles. Penetrator, needs release. Vagina, submissive, receiver, not needed. Anything but ‘liberating’.
I’m not going the repeat the ‘choices’ and ‘judgement’ bit again.
I know that. However, our society being so loose with sex, is why it is assumed if you are in a relationship, even unmarried, you must be fucking. And apparently men cannot be uninterested in sex. My boyfriend get that bullshit recently as well. I wouldn’t even french kiss. We do the non-sexual things of romance. And let's not forget the research on sex and STDs, that wastes money that could be going towards more value things such as medicine and cures. And the waste of resources on sex toys, sex shops, and BDSM stuff.
I’m not ‘justifying’ it. It’s not rape as she had nothing to lose, nothing to take, nothing to violate.
*Sigh*, I already mentioned the bullshit that is the ‘Madonna/Whore Complex”. And most things Freud thought was bullshit. It is nothing more than a man (or woman), respecting themselves, women, and the concepts of romance and marriage. That woman made herself an object already. I am not going to speak out the bullshit that is the ‘double standard’ again. Physical. Differences. Seriously, what is so bloody hard to under?
She is no place to judge another’s sexual needs and wants. They are not ‘women’, they are girls.
However, research on sex and STDs are important as people are directly connected and influenced by these
Sexual health is interconnected with many important medical fields of research. Research for medicines and cures have already a considerable support relative to political policies among states.
In the case of rape, the matter should be focused on the behaviors or the perpetrator and victim to better analyses the situation in order to punish the perpetrator and help the victim.
You are still redundant, how can you say you don't believe in the Madonna/Whore Complex if you are supporting sexual double standards?
I acknowledge there are sexual differences, but such differences does not declare anyone the uke and seme. that is a social construction.
When I mention "sex Trafficker" it was because these motherfuckers understand how virginity is important in order to sell these girls at higher prices, which puts these motherfuckers to be the worst types of human beings.
If our societies are becoming sexually more active, that's because people no longer have a biased and narrow-minded definition of sex, gender, and sexuality. Is that bad? If wisely used, it's positive for human progress.
I respect people who want to be and/or are asexual, the thing is we have to acknowledge that we live in a complex world and we truly need to analyze as carefully and unbiased as possible moral and ethical issues.
It’s your own damn fault if you get an STD, just as it would be your own of you became sick eating rotten food, or rare meat or poisonous berries. Deal with it yourself. That money could also be going towards building homes, both at home and in Third World countries as well.
Why, a few people, like dear little Sandra Fluke expected the public to pay for contraception. I may not like him, but Rush Limbaugh was very correct in calling her a slut and a prostitute.
Oh, and therein lays another misandric standard: that female-only spaces are ok, especially in gyms in case they are ‘ogled’ and ‘objectified’. Oh, the horror! And would it be ok for a lesbian to ogle you? Those men are usually to busy exercising. And again, women are free to ogle men and it's not misandric or sexist.Take the Coke advert with the guy mowing the lawn, for example, and the Cadbury Crisplo one. One woman said it was saying it is was ok to go after a younger woman, that she is being 'objectified' when the girl was clearly going after her boyfriend's dad. And when I told woman that, she basically said 'a young woman can't rape an older man'. Again, sorry to get off topic, but my mind is like that.
However, male-only spaces are ‘PRUF DAT TEH PATRIACHY STIL ECISTS!!!!”.
Of course, but we should understand that, while the rape is always the perpetrator’s fault, the victim (male or female) is still putting themselves in a vulnerable position, by getting drunk, not watching their drink for example. I am not ‘blaming the victim’, I am just saying that, in a world of equality, everyone takes responsibility to keep themselves or others safe. However, I do also understand that you can be the most responsible person in the world and still have that happen to you. It just reduces your chance of suffering.
*Facepalm* THERE IS NO BLOODY ‘DOUBLE STANDARD’! Sorry, but you’re still being thick in regards to this.
Where the hell do you think seme and uke came from? It is not this ‘social construction’ rubbish? It physically works that way. Unless it is pegging, it is that way. There is nothing wrong with a man wanting a virgin wife. It is not ‘sexist’, ‘misogynistic’, or ‘oppressive’. As I just said, it about a man respecting himself, woman, and romance/marriage. They want a woman who will with them and them alone. They are not trying to ‘control’ women (they are allowed themselves to be controlled by lust and penis). They want that first time to be not-so-good and clumsy, as I read one man saying. I’m sure no one would bat an eyelid a woman (or a man) wanting a virgin husband.
That’s true. However, for me, rapists, animal/child abusers (which I suppose would in include those) and murderers deserve the death penalty. Too bad it was banned decades ago here
It is not ‘narrow’ to respect oneself and their love life. Yes, it is good that homosexuality, asexuality and transgenderism are gradually being more accepted, such ‘freedom’ has also led to more STDs, more money being wasted, and again, general selfishness. This is a little of topic, but: perhaps we can even more on from men in dresses 'trannies' as well, since no cares with a woman wears a suit and tie. I believe it is ridiculous to gender a piece of fabric for its shape. Beside, this is another thing, along with pink and blue, that was the other way around. I keep wondering who it came to swap.
*Sigh* Again, I agree. I am a very political person after all.
There is no sense of building infrastructures if no one will occupy them due to poor health and bad prevention.
Rush Limbaugh is only correct when it comes to the public paying for contraceptives, but he demonstrates to be a misogynist by judging her so quickly. Contraceptives have a medical function, that of regulating menstrual cycles if their bodies do not take care of that.
I believe only those kinds of emergency contraceptives should be supported due to their medical reasons
"A younger woman cannot rape an older guy", men can be raped too, you know, the effects are different.
It is true that both the victim and victimizer should be held accountable in order to know the truth as much as possible, but Justice has the punish the perpetrator and formulate rational ways, without biases, to avoid these situations. Many countries had very stupid solutions that are always centered on using the victims to avoid looking at the reality of the problem. (In Gorontalo-Indonesia, women cannot wear dresses that show skin, this being influenced by Muslim morale rather than rationality). Did rapes and sexual harassment cases decreased? nope, these actually had a slight increase. That is misogyny, when you put the blame on women only. These people failed on recognizing that the perpetrators were a huge part of the problem and at fault of this is by believing in the Sexual supremacy of Men.
This is why sexual equality is important and vital, it helps both genders to understand none cannot overpower the other
Social constructions are rubbish and useless, more based on fictitious expectations rather than factual reason
It is not ethical if a "sexually experienced" man requires his future wife to be a "virgin", unless the girl accepts. that is not what equality is about, it is not fair, but like I said again, if the girl accepts him, that's her deal. If we are in such a context, then it is fair and reasonable for "Sexually-Experienced" women to marry a "Virgin" boy, just as both "Virgins" and Sexually-experienced" individuals can do so, there is no ethical and moral problem.
I don't support Death Penalties because we are letting these bastards to have an easy escape, I want them to suffer hell in earth first, to have the punishment fit the crime.
I agree it is not "narrow" to respect your love life, but it depends on the substance within the flask.
Oh, I’m guessing your referring to the HIV/AIDs dangers? I had forgotten of that.
Oh, no, how dare a man criticize an all mighty-vagina owner. Yet again, woman are allowed to insult men sexually and grope all they like. She clearly is a slut if she’s having such sex she can afford the contraception. And paying someone pay for your sex sessions is prostitution. You are paying someone to have sex.
No, no, no. I was telling what the other person, though I will refrain from mentioning her name. I believe that anyone can anyone of any gender, orientation or age.
Indeed. As people say “don’t teach a woman to not get raped. Teach a man not rape’. However in itself is sexist/a little homophobic, as it assumes all victims are female and all attackers male. Men make up a fair amount of rape victims, near half in some places, but it seems so low that because most men are afraid to report it, and they will always be ridiculed.
However, if one is wearing clothing meant to display the body in a sexual manner, and if she is so ‘confident in your body’, then you have no right to complain or call men rapists/perverts/pigs for having a sex drive. And again, they are allowed to fawn and giggle over men’s muscles, and butts, and whatnot.
It is not‘misogynistic’ , it is ‘sexist’. Misogynistic is the hatred of women. Even if it is sexual, the person say things like that is just saying what they think will keep people more safe, as misguided the attitude is. The intention is good, but the method not.
The thing about dresses is bloody ridiculous. Unless someone had some kind of fetish, who is going to be turned on by naked arms or legs?
Well, I’m sorry, but I can’t see heterosexual intercourse any other way. However, I do believe it can a romantic thing. I truly do, but it is also a great commitment for someone. The same goes for same-sex relationship of course.
I’m not explaining it again.
I used to think like that, but do you not dislike the fact that your tax money is keeping them alive? Yes, the whole ‘we don’t want to suffer’ is disgusting. What about the people or animals they made suffer. The person who’s body they violated, the person who took an innocent’s life. They need to suffer as much as their victims did, have it etched into their minds before they go to hell. Yes, there has sadly been many a mischarge of justice, but surely forensics have advanced to the point where it would hard to convict the wrong person.
As in personality?
Both genders can practice their sexualities in the ways they prefer (without stepping out of moral and ethical lines)
The rule is to live and let live.
Teaching people to not do horrible things to each other (both genders), will contribute to the reduction of rapes and sexual harassment. it is for both genders and parties to play the part and cooperate
On the death penalty, for bad news, society is very lenient in the way of treating criminals, it is a complicated issue indeed
Well of course.
Again, of course.
Yes, but again, we cannot get rid of the typical attitudes completely. For example, in roughly…fifty years’ time (I’m just trying to be realistic, judging from how long it took women to gain most of their rights), men will be fully accepted as victims of abuse and rape.
Um-hm. Oh, I’m not saying that we should start bringing back public executions. That would endanger the public and cause suffering for the perpetrator’s family (unless they are the cause or were involved the perpetrator’s crimes, I believe they should be treated with the same respect as the victim’s loved ones). I just think we give them too much. However, I still believe they should have rights to books and art (recently my wonderful government tried to ban families bringing books, and books entirely, and later on art). I am very big on justice, but no-one, not even criminals or those in asylums, should be derived of the written word. Nor should art be banned. Yes, the things these…people…have created are disturbing, but, obviously, that also gives us in an insight into their mind. Yes, unless we are those ourselves, we can never completely understand the mind of such an individual, but research still should be done.
Oh, and another important issue in that regard is famed people, celebrities, being treated more better and given more lenient sentences.
There I went, off topic again. I’m just a very political person, you see.
Women and men need to redefine the concepts of what is masculine and what is feminine, our generation is a wonderful mosaic in comparison to older generations. We embody the complexity of human nature, not based of natural laws and social laws, but on our individuality and uniqueness. However I do believe our generation needs the value of social responsibility and drive for improvement.
simply open your mind to new theories and ideas, and through them built your mosaic
Have you noticed I how wonderful is to discuss and have an open mind? Humans have the need for mental enrichment
Well, I don’t think we should label femininity or masculinity as ‘acting like a woman/man”. We should just think of them as traits, and which traits we perfer or display. And most of us are a mixture of both, anyway, as I am guessing you agree from the last sentence.
Yes, I do. Anyone would perfer it to arguing. Yes, I like having a good, pleasant conversation as much as any person, but sometimes, debate is good for learning or practicing communication.
We have put our ideas to the table and explained them in quite long comments as you will see
But hey, it exercises the the mind to understand oneself and be open to new ideas, aye?
Indeed. And I do so enjoy long comments I can think about and have to take time and thinking to respond to.
Aye, sur. I'm getting to be a little more open with each of the better conversations.
Though you have every right to, I'm just disappointed that even though we are typing so calmly and eloquently to one another, you still insult me in your conversations with that lassie. And I don't block so fast nor, have any reason to block you. I only block spammers and invaders (people who jump onto your profile to leave insults).
Have you notice that in the later comments I stopped insulting?
After that, there were critiques with no informal insulting
This happen many days ago, actually, there is no longer a need to insult, and that feeling took place days ago
We showed each others' views eloquently with not much results, only having a truce of "agree to disagree"
But it's OK, these type of conversations are the ones that wake up my brain fully, it is good for the soul to inquire
I suppose I did not notice, but…not consciously?
Oh, good
Well, yes, but I hope I have at least made some progress, not against you, but rather, for me.
Yes, sorry to add on again, but it keeps life interesting.
She's really so misogynistic as to say that a woman is in part to blame if they get sexually harassed because they are confident with their body??
It doesn't matter what the woman is wearing, a man ought to have enough self control to respect another person. Never is an outfit grounds to harass anybody. I see a handsome man dressed in an admirable way but do I ever go up and start touching him? Fuck no. That's completely inappropriate in societal standards and in regards to his personal space and feelings.
Women shouldn't have to hide themselves because some people can't control themselves and men shouldn't either. We should all have the self control and moral to not harass anybody just because they're dressed nicely or revealing.
By her standards, everybody should go to the pool or beach in pants and long sleeved shirts >_>
It shouldn't be one or the other responsibility, it's BOTH sides responsibility to behave with restraint and respect.
If somebody, man or woman, sees somebody passed out or very drunk, it's their responsibility to behave like a moral and respectful person and not take advantage.
Even if that other person isn't doing so, SOMEBODY ought to. Just because somebody else is being irresponsible, that doesn't justify others to be as well.
Never is it okay to take advantage of somebody who is incapacitated. Doing so makes you a pervert with no self control or respect.
As adults, it's our job to behave responsibly even if others are not. That's what being an adult is.
In regards to sex, she truly is ignorant about it if she thinks all STDs have obvious signs and that everybody is honest about having one. This simply proves that.
Even if people were to follow her sick little values, a virgin woman could hook up with a man who has had previous partners and he could give her an STD because he lied about it/didn't tell her, the symptoms were not present and/or he didn't know he had one because some people are just carriers.
So now that woman has to suffer an STD even though she followed Naokos ridiculous rules and because in her little world, researching and treating STD is 'a waste' and in her world, a woman isn't allowed to be choosy about the men she hooks up with, only men are allowed to be choosy so she can't tell him no just because he's had partners before her.
I wonder what she'd have to say to that!
It is not 'taking advantage' if the drunken person is all over the other person.
As for STDs, no I do not think that. Again you all assume that because I am aversed to sex and will never be fucked does not mean I am unaware or uneducated in such things. I know perfectly well that some are even completely symptomless. I know people lie too. It's an embarrassing thing, is it not?
She (and so it would be for a he) choose to have sex and risk it. You cannot choose to have cancer (for the most person'), Leukaemia, asthma, psoriasis, AIDs/HIV, cystic fibrosis, Huntington’s disease, cerebral palsy, Down's Syndrome, epilepsy, Kleine-Levin syndrome, OVD, etc. Sorry to list such common ailments, but I was given you an idea. I even know that virgins can have some form of STD when they haven't so much as masturbated.
Make up your damn mind. Is the world wrong for shaming sexual men or is the world wrong for shaming virgin men? Nobody is shaming anybody. I for one don't give a damn if whoever I'm with is a virgin or not. I do like a virgin man because they're more eager and not so quick to become bored like sexual men and that's my right to prefer virgin men. I can be choosy all I want. My body, I get to choose who touches it and who I have sex with.
No duh it's going to elicit certain feelings but when men start to cat call and touch that's inappropriate. Men are adults who should know how to behave despite how they're feeling. They're expected to behave maturely when they're pissed off, they're expected to behave maturely when they see a nice body or a nice pair or legs or what have you.
It's not hypocritical to dress in shorts and a tanktop when it's 95 degrees f and expect men to not bother you over it. I dunno how hot it gets there but here in Oklahoma, you can literally fry an egg on your cars dashboard so I should be able to go out in my shorts and tank and not have to stress over men trying to touch me (in any way) or cat call and make inappropriate remarks.
It's not a woman's job to put up with men, it's a man's job to not behave like a pig to begin with.
Some women don't or can't handle those situations so it's unfair to them to have to put up with that kind of thing just because you think they have it coming because they wore shorts or a skirt and a top that shows some skin.
They have the right to find a woman attractive but it's inappropriate to make that woman feel uncomfortably in the outfit she has the right to wear. No woman should have to dress a certain way just to avoid piggish behavior.
If somebody is drunk and another person takes advantage of that, that's completely scummy. If a drunk person comes onto somebody who is sober, that, to me, seems a lot less scummy since the person being approached is fully capable of making decisions though the person doing the approaching might not have ordinarily done such a thing.
No, actually. Nobody is assuming you're uneducated about sex because you're asexual.
We say you are uneducated about sex because of the things you have said yourself and are still saying.
It's not about your sexuality. Seriously, get over it already. Nobody cares that you're asexual. People care that you're trying to stomp on female reproductive/sexual rights.
Exactly what kind of STD does a virgin get?
By your silly set of rules, a woman is condemned even if she has sex with one man who has had partners before her (which you say is allowed) and has an STD that is passed to her.
You call researching sex and the diseases a waste of resources but in reality, the aforementioned scenario is common. In your little world, she would be doomed to suffer an STD even though she followed your rules because in your world, no research would be done to find treatments and/or cures.
If that man left her, she couldn't have sex ever again because of her STD and/or because in your world, she would be cheating on her next boyfriend.
No, it’s not.
No, it’s not. It’s natural and fine. That is shaming. Yes, they do, they are fully aware of they are doing, as I think you would know.
It was your choice to wear those, as needed as it would be. It is the aroused man’s natural reaction in the form of hastily-put together words. It is not ‘inappropriate’ or being a ‘pig’. Again, you should your hypocrisy, in that woman are allowed to be as sexual as they want and no one is permitted a negative opinon, or they are ‘MISOGYNISTS!’, ‘SEXISTS!’ or ‘OPPRESSORS!!!!’. Again, they have no right to complain of being ‘bothered’ when they have already objectified themselves. I, along with other virgin woman, have a right to complain about that as we are not hypocrites, and we are in full control of our bodies.
Then maybe she should grow a backbone.
It is called equality. If girls are permitted to be as sexual as they want, so are men. And people are allowed a negative opinion on that. Non-virgin woman are hypocrites to judge and complain.
No, it’s not. It is not someone else’s job to stop or look after that drunk person, who choose to get drunk, unless they have requested such. Of course, if I were ever to have friends like that (I never would), I would not just abandon them like some holidaymakers and partygoers do, but I would let them make their own mistakes and learn the hard way. We all make mistakes.
Urgh, again with this. I am expressing my right to an opinion, on one’s choice, as is my right. I am not sitting there whining about freedom of speech and truth equality like you faux-feminists who think all sexual women are perfect, ‘liberated’ beings. If I were to get behind the wheel of a car and went barrelling down the motorway, I would know I would be judged and insulted. That would be someone’s right to do so. If I were to write something in my original story is incredibly narmy, far too cliché, or just plain stupid, I would be judged for it, and people would be free to it. Sex is no different. What is so bloody hard to understand about that, ‘feminist’?
You lot also constantly assume that the sex thing is my whole life and think me some heartless idiot, when, if you had actually read my journals and got to know me, would know I have other interests and pursuits, and hold empathy and care within me. You assume I know not of simple things like masturbation, wet dreams, arousal, orgasms, dominatrixes (even if she is ‘dominant’, it is in a typically false, feminine manner, such as that of the femme fatale, and she usually has been/will let herself be penetrated). While we are of course equals and make choices together, I am dominant as I control myself, and take charge emotionally. I’m it would count for physically as well, as I would be the one to make the protective moves (as I’m not some damsel-in-distress who likes a man being a chauvinist, chivalrous pig). I’m also the one to resort to defensive/arger-caused violence, as well, though I know most would not consider that a good thing. And the stereotypical kind of violent of slapping. Finally, as I said, we kiss, hug and hold each other.
Oral herpes, for one. You can also gain diseases from towels or toilet seats, given that people have done things on them (that, combined with my great mysophobia), keeps from public bathrooms as much as possible.
Ok, the thing about her never having sex again is understandable, if she was planning to have a baby some time. That would not be fair.
You say 99% of the female side of the human race deserves rape. That's pretty heartless to me.
If you don't think women deserve it that's good but you come across as very hateful. If a woman was raped, virgin or not, a normal person would feel compassion and horror,. It doesn't matter if she is s virgin or what she's wearing or if she's germy or anything. It's horrible and traumatic no matter what. But you don't seem to care at all if it happens to be someone you deem a 'slut' this is heartless. If it happened to a woman (or man) you don't say she's a hypocrite for complaining you help her and try to get justice for what's happened.
If you want people to leave you alone try turning around. Try saying, or at least consider non-virgins are people too and aren't some evil germy sex-crazed zombies trying to hurt men or oppress them. I don't know why you think that.
Thank you for separating yourself from these…others.
I do feel compassion – for those who are actually suffering. I feel no sympathy for hypocrites getting their karma and not understand that that trauma and pain they suffer is them realizing and regretting throwing themselves at a man for no good reason.
I am not ‘heartless’ and have mentioned numerous times the evidence that proves I am not, reasons that apply to yourselves too, I’m certain – I give to charity, I really want to help the poor in person, I fight for men and women’s rights, I fight against the dismissal and humiliation of male abuse and rape victims. I fight for GLBT rights, of course. I am a political person and try to fight, or at least bring attention to, injustice in the political world. Those others keep judging me and thinking they know me when they know nothing of me, and keep spouting the same clichés and pseudo-intelligent babble.
Again, it is their attitude. They will not stop whinging about people’s right to an opinion on their choice, so why should others stop having that rightful, just opinion? And they are germy, like it or not. We are all germy. Non-virgin woman, due to the way sex works, be it hetero or homosexual, just carry that little bit more.
They are people, then. Just very immature people. They are girls.
And non-virgins contain these attributes so often... why? Why do you see them all like that?
"would not need to be so hard if they were not such whiney little wimps dressing up their whinging and fear of judgment as ‘feminism’. "
You seem to be hung up on the whole "feminism" word. Why not scribble it out and replace the word with "women who want the same things men get while men get what women have." and tell me why that's so bad. It seems fair to me.
"I do feel compassion – for those who are actually suffering. I feel no sympathy for hypocrites getting their karma and not understand that that trauma and pain they suffer is them realizing and regretting throwing themselves at a man for no good reason. "
And this exception to your compassion is why people are getting upset at you. There shouldn't be any exception at all. A woman isn't hurting anyone by having a sexual relationship with anyone (a man, woman, inbetween, or herself) unless she is raping someone. Why is it karma that she get's hurt so severely then? How can you not feel bad for someone who goes through something so horrible? Even if what a woman was doing was wrong, that's like saying someone who steals deserves torture, it's beyond extreme.
"I am not ‘heartless’ and have mentioned numerous times the evidence that proves I am not, reasons that apply to yourselves too, I’m certain – I give to charity, I really want to help the poor in person, I fight for men and women’s rights, I fight against the dismissal and humiliation of male abuse and rape victims. I fight for GLBT rights, of course. I am a political person and try to fight, or at least bring attention to, injustice in the political world. "
Well, yeah, okay. That may be true. And I couldn't really say you were some ruthless monster out of the pits of hell even without you saying that. It still doesn't make what you're saying about non-virgins right though.
Thing is, try looking it from other's point of view. Take homophobia, which you are adamant against. If some homophobic guy went on some hate-speech saying gay men who get bashed are only getting God's will and it's what they get for defiling their bodies with some evil sin or whatever nonsense a homophobic person says, what are you going to do? Call him out on what he's saying? Call him a bad person? What if he turns around at these accusations, and says "But I'm not a bad person, I donate to charity, I fight against racism, etc etc.." would you, should you, say "Jinkies! I had no idea! You're a swell guy after all! Just let me turn my back and allow you to continue on with your little hate speech!" Or would you say "That's all very well and nice, but what you're doing is still wrong and you really should stop."
"Those others keep judging me and thinking they know me when they know nothing of me, and keep spouting the same clichés and pseudo-intelligent babble.
"
That pseudo-intellectual babble is others trying to reason with you. But you're right, they don't know you, no-body does, they are making judgements based on what they have observed so far. But you can help by letting them or others get to know you, and you try getting to know them and other non-virgins and see that they aren't so bad people. Maybe a bit more reasoning on what your problem is/ are, because (I admit this is just a guess) some of your dislike might be stemming from something that happened to you IRL. Maybe some girl was a bitch to you, maybe your Dad was a jerk, IDK. And they have been guessing, because they want to know why you have all this hate, or "dislike".
"Again, it is their attitude. They will not stop whinging about people’s right to an opinion on their choice, so why should others stop having that rightful, just opinion?"
Well yeah, we all have our right to free-speech. They have theirs and you have yours. It's just kind of getting a bit of conflict regarding the nature of their arguing: rape. Which is a serious form of violence, which nobody wants. And you don't want someone around encouraging violence, do you? They don't want some rape victim seeing what you wrote and getting hurt, or some psycho reading this and getting the idea it's okay to rape someone.
"And they are germy, like it or not. We are all germy. Non-virgin woman, due to the way sex works, be it hetero or homosexual, just carry that little bit more. "
So?
We can argue whether or not non-virgins are germy (and frankly I'm stumped why you would think a girl who jills off gets "germy", or at least germy in the manner it can't be washed off or cause a serious illness). But in the end, so what? People who work with sewage are germy. People in poorer countries are germy. Lots of people are germy. Pilots are at risk of getting who knows how many diseases. Should they be looked down upon for eg. say their choices in career etc? Should they be treated any less? Does it mean they should be attacked and that it serves them right, or that it serves them right if they contract a serious illness that it's just "karma" and no-one should help them?
"They are people, then. Just very immature people. They are girls. "
Once again, So? Lots of people are immature. I'm immature a lot of the time. It's no reason to not feel bad for them when they get raped.
But it is not that. They want to be free from all rightful, equality-supporting judgement and criticism will they scream at men for doing so much as harmless wolf whistling, while they call men perverts and rapists for daring to express their sexuality. And most laughably of all, they say, that men being sexually attracted to them, is ‘misogynistic’. I fight for actually rights, something few feminists do nowadays, continuing to add to our reputation. As a result, people who support men’s rights too are told to call themselves ‘humanists’. Don’t get wrong, I don’t mind the title, but the problem is that feminist is seen as a bad thing, and girls like this are not helping.
Yes she is. She is spreading germs and most likely disease as well. She is insulting feminism and naturalness of pregnancy. If I were stolen from if I steal before, I would have no reason to complain, no non-virgin women have nothing to complain about. I understand that some easily-offended people might be upset about this, being that it is true equality (taking responsibility for one’s actions, instead of calling it ‘victim blaming’. but I simply do not support hypocrisy. And yes, I know we are all hypocrites. If she was engaged or marriage and that happened, even if she had sex with her fiancé, husband or wife, as she has made a commitment to someone.
Well, thank you. Well, I’m sorry, but it is just the way I think, and it is made worse because of these selfish attitudes that exist. If a woman were to just have sex for pleasure with her partner, behind closed doors, that would be fine, they are not affection anyone else. It is when they scream about non-existent ‘double standards’, while ignoring the biological logical behind such a (perfectly allowed) opinon, and say that having casual sex is good, and, as I said, shoving their non-virginity and so-called ‘liberation’ (when it is far from it) down everyone’s throats, instead of focusing on real issues. A good ‘feminist blog’ I have found is The Mary Sue, for example. She cares about women and men and fights against bigger issues (as well as sexism in pop culture/fiction, something seen as trivial and meaningless, despite how much it effects and has effected real life).
The difference is, having recreational heterosexual intercourse is a choice. Homosexuality, no matter what some cunts say, is not a choice. It is natural attraction to the same gender. Yes, heterosexual lust and attraction is natural too I know. It is just that homosexual intercourse is far less likely to be selfish (that’s not to say there is not homosexual manipulators or rapists). I also understand that homosexuals are not perfect, as well, but that they are simply human, and humans judge and are judged, make choices, sometimes stupid/pointless/selfish ones.
No, no, if someone wants to have a calm conversation about it, then I am happy. Just as I would be happy to have a conversation with a homophobe is understand why they think (well, if it were reasons outside ‘it’s an abomination!’ or ‘God says so!’).
Those are the very clichés, though. That it was thought it by religion, that I was molested/raped, or (and I laughed at this) dumped for a sexually active girl. You say it is because of my mother or my ‘father’ that I have ‘daddy issues’ (
They also came out with crap that Matt is only with me as he hopes to get sex one day, and that we won’t last because we don’t have sex and that ‘when his balls drop’ he dump me for someone else, even though they are plenty of non-sexual ways to be romantic. We kiss on the lips, for example. They know nothing of our relationship, how long we’ve known each other (and when I explained such, of course they did not believe me, and continued with their perceived image of me), while being all smug about their ‘normal’ and not ‘shallow’ relationships.
Well, as I’ve said before, no matter how much we wash down there, we will still produce natural but disgusting fluids. You can’t ‘wash off’ one of biggest changes in your life (and that fact is that is considered something so little nowadays is so…cold). No, those are needed, as they need those jobs to live, or to enjoy life, and those germs, bar the sewage, are not so intimate.
Oh, and I never thought non-virgins were not human. I was just sick of the rage so I threw out a sarcastic comment. Again, it’s the hypocrisy bit. I at least acknowledge the ways in wish I am hypocritical, an example being I am and consider myself a strong woman, but insult that but my needless crying. I don’t like boastful or cocky people, but like most people, I boast sometimes as well. Again, an overused statement, but we are human.
“I do not see them all like that. They are just what I encounter most when simply browsing for me own means, some whiney little flower on Tumblr, Feminsite, Jezebel, LiveJournal This Slut Votes, the SlutWalk bullshit that is still going on, an affront to feminism (it just made our reputation fall even lower), and self respecting women everywhere.”
And why are you going to those sites in the first place?
“This very deviation (along with many, selfish, sexist, petty others) is an example of such an attitude. This being the ‘anti-abortion is ANTI-WOMENZ!” when they turn around and be completely anti-responsibility, anti-male, and selfish. They claim that medical and necessary ultrasound (yes, it is necessary, to make sure the woman is absolutely willing to murder something she once was in one of the greatest acts of hypocrisy there can be), when they already been penetrated by a germ-riddled penis. There is nothing ‘sexist’, ‘misogynistic’ or ‘controlling women’s bodies’ or ‘reproductive rights’. It is hypocrisy, they already gave their body to another. “
Because you know it is their own body which they own (and still own no matter who they have sex with), and have a right to preserve their own life if a pregnancy might risk her life or a possible child’s well-being. And yeah it is irresponsible if a woman goes around screwing willy nilly without protection. But it’s waaay more irresponsible to bring a life into the world where the woman has neither the finances nor the competence to look after a child which ends up with a kid starving to death in a cupboard in a pile of its own faeces because the mother knows squat about raising children. An abortion on the other hand is terminating a “life” before it begins a life of suffering. And just because an embryo was what each of us where at that point doesn’t mean we should preserve it. We were an ovum once, does that mean every time a woman has her period she is committing murder?
“But it is not that. They want to be free from all rightful, equality-supporting judgement and criticism will they scream at men for doing so much as harmless wolf whistling, while they call men perverts and rapists for daring to express their sexuality. And most laughably of all, they say, that men being sexually attracted to them, is ‘misogynistic’. I fight for actually rights, something few feminists do nowadays, continuing to add to our reputation. As a result, people who support men’s rights too are told to call themselves ‘humanists’. Don’t get wrong, I don’t mind the title, but the problem is that feminist is seen as a bad thing, and girls like this are not helping.”
If a guy (or a girl) is running around in the privacy of her home oogling over porn or something, this is expressing their sexuality and these girls should mind their own business. If a guy (or a girl) is out on the streets harassing someone this isn’t expressing their sexuality, they’re being a jerk, and it’s what people do to rile people up. I mean, you didn’t like it when you started getting all this attention lately, and you complained, why can’t they? But no, someone “wolf-whistling” isn’t a rapist. They may be over-reacting, but then, what have you been doing lately on certain other sites?
“Yes she is. She is spreading germs and most likely disease as well.”
Not if she’s getting the guy to wear a rubber, she isn’t. Or, you know, jilling off on her own (who would she be spreading the “germs” to?). Or people who get blood tests first, to make sure they haven’t got anything before they do anything.
If she knew she had something and intentionally spread something, yeah, that would be wrong though. Most of the time though, people try to stop the spread of disease.
“She is insulting feminism and naturalness of pregnancy.”
And an insult is seriously harmful, because…?
“If I were stolen from if I steal before, I would have no reason to complain, no non-virgin women have nothing to complain about.”
Ummm, no no no no. Stealing can’t even begin to equate with something like rape. Stealing is a petty crime (which is why I gave an example before), while rape is extreme violence, and there is never any excuse for it. And why would consensual sex be considered stealing? Because she gave her body once to a guy and it belongs to him now? That’s like saying people have the right to steal then vandalise e a bunch of books from a library which lends out books just because it some people have borrowed from it before.
You don’t get a book from a library to keep forever, you RETURN it. And you don’t damage it, because it still isn’t your property. You take it for an allotted period of time with your library card, enjoy it, then give it back. If you don’t, or take the book without permission, you’re in trouble, and the librarian has every right to send you a fine. And as such, if a man or woman rapes a person they should be punished for it as no-one has the right to have sex without someone’s consent.
“I understand that some easily-offended people might be upset about this, being that it is true equality (taking responsibility for one’s actions, instead of calling it ‘victim blaming’. but I simply do not support hypocrisy. And yes, I know we are all hypocrites. If she was engaged or marriage and that happened, even if she had sex with her fiancé, husband or wife, as she has made a commitment to someone.”
Commitments can end. And committing to one person does not mean committing to every other single male on the planet for the rest of eternity.
“Well, thank you. Well, I’m sorry, but it is just the way I think, and it is made worse because of these selfish attitudes that exist. If a woman were to just have sex for pleasure with her partner, behind closed doors, that would be fine, they are not affection anyone else.”
Which is what “non-virgins” do. (Or should be doing).
“It is when they scream about non-existent ‘double standards’, while ignoring the biological logical behind such a (perfectly allowed) opinon, and say that having casual sex is good, and, as I said, shoving their non-virginity and so-called ‘liberation’ (when it is far from it) down everyone’s throats, instead of focusing on real issues. A good ‘feminist blog’ I have found is The Mary Sue, for example. She cares about women and men and fights against bigger issues (as well as sexism in pop culture/fiction, something seen as trivial and meaningless, despite how much it effects and has effected real life).”
Abortion is a real issue though.
“The difference is, having recreational heterosexual intercourse is a choice. Homosexuality, no matter what some cunts say, is not a choice. It is natural attraction to the same gender. Yes, heterosexual lust and attraction is natural too I know. It is just that homosexual intercourse is far less likely to be selfish (that’s not to say there is not homosexual manipulators or rapists). I also understand that homosexuals are not perfect, as well, but that they are simply human, and humans judge and are judged, make choices, sometimes stupid/pointless/selfish ones.”
How is heterosexual sex selfish? “Germs”? Once again you have condoms and blood-tests for that. Pregnancy? Okay, if homosexual sex is better because it can’t result in pregnancy, what about women who are infertile. Women who have gone past menopause? Girls who are above legal age but haven’t finished puberty (it’s 2-3 years after a girl starts bleeding before she starts ovulating). A woman who is on her period? Women who use contraceptives? None of these will result in pregnancy either so why not group them with homosexuals too?
“No, no, if someone wants to have a calm conversation about it, then I am happy. Just as I would be happy to have a conversation with a homophobe is understand why they think (well, if it were reasons outside ‘it’s an abomination!’ or ‘God says so!’).”
Okay
“Those are the very clichés, though. That it was thought it by religion, that I was molested/raped, or (and I laughed at this) dumped for a sexually active girl. You say it is because of my mother or my ‘father’ that I have ‘daddy issues’ (
I couldn’t care less about my ‘father’, and I was barely a year old when my mother left him), and my mother, like all good parents, taught me and give me the tools to learn, but let me think for myself. It is those attitudes (the father/rape thing) that annoys me.”
It was a guess. People come up with these things because your ideas had to come from somewhere. I don’t get it though. You just one day (or took a while to come up with this) decided to say “non-virgins can’t be raped”?
“They also came out with crap that Matt is only with me as he hopes to get sex one day, and that we won’t last because we don’t have sex and that ‘when his balls drop’ he dump me for someone else, even though they are plenty of non-sexual ways to be romantic. We kiss on the lips, for example. They know nothing of our relationship, how long we’ve known each other (and when I explained such, of course they did not believe me, and continued with their perceived image of me), while being all smug about their ‘normal’ and not ‘shallow’ relationships.”
I’m kind of guessing it was to get you riled up. And in some cases out there this does happen in relationships. People change. Your BF might change. YOU might change. It might be something to keep in mind, at least as a mental exercise. And no, no-one knows how you and your BF are, that’s your businesses’.
“Well, as I’ve said before, no matter how much we wash down there, we will still produce natural but disgusting fluids.”
It isn’t that disgusting.
“You can’t ‘wash off’ one of biggest changes in your life (and that fact is that is considered something so little nowadays is so…cold). No, those are needed, as they need those jobs to live, or to enjoy life, and those germs, bar the sewage, are not so intimate. “
Except we do need sex to enjoy life. I mean, why should I or any women go every minute every day every year for the rest of their lives never getting any relief from an irritating cramp or burning down there for? Why put up with that?
“Oh, and I never thought non-virgins were not human. I was just sick of the rage so I threw out a sarcastic comment. Again, it’s the hypocrisy bit. I at least acknowledge the ways in wish I am hypocritical, an example being I am and consider myself a strong woman, but insult that but my needless crying. I don’t like boastful or cocky people, but like most people, I boast sometimes as well. Again, an overused statement, but we are human.”
What do you expect, you were talking about rape.
No, they have not right to be selfish, hypocritical monsters. They were a foetus once, they were once that ‘parasite’, that ‘accident’, that ‘mistake’, that [insert other, sick, disgusting words for an innocent life here]. Every thing on the planet is technically a parasite, as we must feed on another living thing to survive (most plants are perhaps the expection). Besides, a parasite is defined as a creature of other species. No, it was irresponsible for her to go sleeping around full stop. Pregnancy does not to be ‘protected’ from. Nor is it an ‘accident’ or ‘unwanted’. If it was, that woman would not have choosen to have sex. If she could not ‘afford it’ (which is bullshit anyway), or ‘was not ready’ then she would not be ready to have a penis inside her. Pregnancy, apart from childbirth, is nothing compared to sex that came before it. No one can predict the future. My mother given the suggestion to abort me because of my conditions, they said I would never walk, talk, read or write. And I’ve done that and so much more. How would she have known that if she was so selfish (not to mention she wanted a child). If the ‘women’ (or stupid, selfish girl) really is so heartless and inhuman, then she can find another family to give the child to. It is not ‘selfish’, it is not ‘sexist’, it is not ‘oppressive’ or ‘trying to control women’ (when they have allowed themselves to be controlled by men), it is equality for all. And again, just like others who believe that disgusting, selfish, sexist attitude, you ignore the potential suffering of the man who just lost his child. That’s not utterly sexist, a double standard, and hypocritical or anything. Here we go with the period excuse. That, again, is natural. Simple. Just like pregnancy is.
Not if they are boasting about it and calling it their ‘feminist right’ or whatever. It is not ‘harassment’ or when that girl has already broken that great boundary. She is hypocritical to complain as she is a sexual being. It is natural, as OMG, men have a right to a sex drive as well. I just keep coming back to correct the idiotic assumptions and pettiness of these compete strangers.
As I said, it gives feminism a bad name and encourages selfishness and sexism against men.
It is not ‘extreme’. They are far more extreme things you can do to harm the body, my dear. Rape is not some special crime. It is simply abuse as horrid as any other. Let me give another example then – if I were hit someone who did not deserve it, then I could not complain about someone else striking me, as I’ve already done that. Excluding the marriage/engagement thing I mentioned, that girl is a hypocrite for claiming rape as she had already been penetrated and regardless of the damage, it makes no difference to her status. And I also explained why she is really traumatized, but again, that is not make the mental suffering any less real.
That’s not what I meant. What I meant is, if a virgin woman became engaged or married someone, male or female, and even if they were to have sex with them, they could still be raped, as they have made a commitment to someone and that violator is also violating the commitment. As for the other bit, if a virgin woman were to have sex with a man/woman and commit to them, then for some reason they break up (I’m not saying it is her fault), and she get manages to get a relationship with another man or woman, she is a hypocrite if she ever claims he or she is ‘cheating’ on or ‘betraying’ her, as she already cheated on them. They just had the kindness and goodness to forgive her (they do that if they pursue the relationship). If that woman was a widow, however, then I suppose it can be considered cheating on the other partner’s part (you know, the whole ‘death do us part’ bit).
Well, they don’t.
No, it is not an ‘issue’. The issue is that it exists for non-rape reasons.
I already explained – the selfishness in regards to pregnancy and the possible betrayal. They have no reason to have sex, but can still chose to if they wish. Again, I never said or implied I would stop anyone making that choice. I am not one of those disgusting people who think a woman who does not want children (again, if she did not, she would not partake in heterosexual intercourse for ‘fun’), or is infertile is horrible person or, sickeningly, ‘broken’. Again, it’s the attitudes I dislike.
I’ve said that before too. As my mother was not one to lie, when I put forth the big baby question at six, she bought me a book (for children) called “Where do I Come From?. Of course, these idiots on here think she ‘traumatized me’ and that a six year old could not possibility understand such a thing. The other parents were like that too, “*gasp* it has nude pictures! That’s obscene!”. And as I learned more in reproduction lessons (what you would call ‘sex ed’, I’m guessing) in science in first and second year, then biology and human biology the rest, I began to formulate my views, as I thought about the way sex worked.
I can safely say I will never be interested in sex. Yes, I might want to get pregnant someday, you never know (but not in the ‘my biological clock is ticking’ kind of way), but I still wholly wish to adopt, but only when I’ve had my life first. I have my friends, my writing, my curiosity, until then. Yes, I’ve stopped judging other people’s non-marital relationships as being more then just sex, so maybe they should stop their stereotyping of mine.
People also think he a ‘doormat’ because he dares do what a woman tells him, and think that he wishes to ‘protect’ or ‘save’ when he’s anything but a chauvinist pig. A certain someone also thinks he’ll agree if anything I see because if not, I would ‘rage’ and thinks that I am also ‘raging’. Another stereotype, as her experiences do not apply to all.
They contain waste products. How can they not be disgusting? And most women don’t exactly look forward to periods.
If you ‘need’ sex (sex is not a ‘need’ unless you are a man unable to come from masturbation or wet dreams), then you are a pretty sad person indeed. What does that say for asexuals?
“I was curious as to what others who claim to be feminists believe. “
Fair enough
“No, they have not right to be selfish, hypocritical monsters. They were a foetus once, they were once that ‘parasite’, that ‘accident’, that ‘mistake’, that [insert other, sick, disgusting words for an innocent life here]. Every thing on the planet is technically a parasite, as we must feed on another living thing to survive (most plants are perhaps the expection). Besides, a parasite is defined as a creature of other species. No, it was irresponsible for her to go sleeping around full stop. Pregnancy does not to be ‘protected’ from. Nor is it an ‘accident’ or ‘unwanted’. If it was, that woman would not have choosen to have sex. If she could not ‘afford it’ (which is bullshit anyway), or ‘was not ready’ then she would not be ready to have a penis inside her. Pregnancy, apart from childbirth, is nothing compared to sex that came before it. No one can predict the future. My mother given the suggestion to abort me because of my conditions, they said I would never walk, talk, read or write. And I’ve done that and so much more. How would she have known that if she was so selfish (not to mention she wanted a child).”
I can see why you place a lot of value in “pro-life” considering your circumstances. Your case was a success story. This doesn’t always happen though, and there a lot of negative experiences out there that people are considering when having an abortion as well. And your case may just have easily have failed. What if you couldn’t walk or talk? What if you couldn’t see at all, and not hear?
What if your mother didn’t know how to raise a child and neglected to look after you? Yeah, like I said, people should be responsible and not get pregnant in the first place if they realise they can’t be parents (and some people are never “ready”). But to expect them to never have sex because of this is a bit much, but I’ll get to that later…
“If the ‘women’ (or stupid, selfish girl) really is so heartless and inhuman, then she can find another family to give the child to.”
You do realise how many orphans there are that never get people to look after them, right? And how rough it is for them, right?
“It is not ‘selfish’, it is not ‘sexist’, it is not ‘oppressive’ or ‘trying to control women’ (when they have allowed themselves to be controlled by men), it is equality for all. And again, just like others who believe that disgusting, selfish, sexist attitude, you ignore the potential suffering of the man who just lost his child. That’s not utterly sexist, a double standard, and hypocritical or anything.”
Thought exercise: what if it was the woman who wanted to keep the child, and the man who wanted her to get the abortion, because he didn’t want the responsibility? Guys do that sometimes, you know.
“Here we go with the period excuse. That, again, is natural. Simple. Just like pregnancy is.”
Miscarriages are natural too.
“Not if they are boasting about it and calling it their ‘feminist right’ or whatever. It is not ‘harassment’ or when that girl has already broken that great boundary. She is hypocritical to complain as she is a sexual being. It is natural, as OMG, men have a right to a sex drive as well. I just keep coming back to correct the idiotic assumptions and pettiness of these compete strangers.”
She has a right to complain. People need to work and study in harassment free environments. And harassment has little to do with sex drive and more to do with the harasser wanting to get a reaction out of the harrassee.
“As I said, it gives feminism a bad name and encourages selfishness and sexism against men. “
Some girls out there do. Maybe these bloggers or whatever are idiots but that doesn’t mean women everywhere who have a sex drive have to put up with men being an ass. It’s wrong for a woman to do that to a man so why not vice versa?
“It is not ‘extreme’. They are far more extreme things you can do to harm the body, my dear. Rape is not some special crime. It is simply abuse as horrid as any other.”
Yes that is true there are worse things. It is still a serious crime though.
“ Let me give another example then – if I were hit someone who did not deserve it, then I could not complain about someone else striking me, as I’ve already done that.”
Hitting someone is a form of harm. Having consensual sex with someone is not a form of harm. It is a reward; the guy and girl (or whatever variation of sexes) are enjoying each other’s company. If someone hit you after you gave them a reward that would be rather unfair wouldn’t it?
“Excluding the marriage/engagement thing I mentioned, that girl is a hypocrite for claiming rape as she had already been penetrated and regardless of the damage, it makes no difference to her status. And I also explained why she is really traumatized, but again, that is not make the mental suffering any less real.”
Her status.
So according to you, never mind the physical trauma, her reproductive (and possibly internal) organs bleeding, the lack of security, the disgust. It’s her status that she has to worry about. If she doesn’t have that, then why worry? Her status is such a precious thing to lose if she gave it up before it’s karma if she gets raped. She should never have given up her “status”. But if she was a virgin who lost her “status”, it’s a horrible atrocity.
Is that seriously what you’re saying?
“That’s not what I meant. What I meant is, if a virgin woman became engaged or married someone, male or female, and even if they were to have sex with them, they could still be raped, as they have made a commitment to someone and that violator is also violating the commitment. As for the other bit, if a virgin woman were to have sex with a man/woman and commit to them, then for some reason they break up (I’m not saying it is her fault), and she get manages to get a relationship with another man or woman, she is a hypocrite if she ever claims he or she is ‘cheating’ on or ‘betraying’ her, as she already cheated on them. They just had the kindness and goodness to forgive her (they do that if they pursue the relationship). If that woman was a widow, however, then I suppose it can be considered cheating on the other partner’s part (you know, the whole ‘death do us part’ bit).”
How can she cheat on him if she at the time didn’t even know him? How do you betray someone you don’t even know? Didn’t you already say you can’t predict the future? What if your BF decides to leave you or you leave him, does that mean you’ve already betrayed the next man (or woman) who loves you?
“Well, they don’t.”
You cannot judge the behaviour of the majority of “non-virgins” based on the opinions of a bunch of bloggers or LJers you found online.
“No, it is not an ‘issue’. The issue is that it exists for non-rape reasons.” It kind of is. It’s discussed on the news or talk shows and magazines quite a bit sometimes.
Just an example: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of…
“I already explained – the selfishness in regards to pregnancy and the possible betrayal. They have no reason to have sex, but can still chose to if they wish. Again, I never said or implied I would stop anyone making that choice. I am not one of those disgusting people who think a woman who does not want children (again, if she did not, she would not partake in heterosexual intercourse for ‘fun’), or is infertile is horrible person or, sickeningly, ‘broken’. Again, it’s the attitudes I dislike.”
Okay
“I’ve said that before too. As my mother was not one to lie, when I put forth the big baby question at six, she bought me a book (for children) called “Where do I Come From?. Of course, these idiots on here think she ‘traumatized me’ and that a six year old could not possibility understand such a thing. The other parents were like that too, “*gasp* it has nude pictures! That’s obscene!”. And as I learned more in reproduction lessons (what you would call ‘sex ed’, I’m guessing) in science in first and second year, then biology and human biology the rest, I began to formulate my views, as I thought about the way sex worked.”
No offense, but I think you do seem kind of traumatised, but more likely from your “sex-ed”. It might not even be caused by either, but whatever the cause, you simply had some sort of issue with things and people speculated why that would be. And no, you’re not curled up on the bed in a catatonic state, but you seem to be highly concerned with virginity and STD’s and “germy penises” that most people don’t worry about. And yeah I know you go out and do other things and live life. But it has affected you in your behaviour towards others.
“I can safely say I will never be interested in sex. Yes, I might want to get pregnant someday, you never know (but not in the ‘my biological clock is ticking’ kind of way), but I still wholly wish to adopt, but only when I’ve had my life first. I have my friends, my writing, my curiosity, until then. Yes, I’ve stopped judging other people’s non-marital relationships as being more then just sex, so maybe they should stop their stereotyping of mine.
People also think he a ‘doormat’ because he dares do what a woman tells him, and think that he wishes to ‘protect’ or ‘save’ when he’s anything but a chauvinist pig. A certain someone also thinks he’ll agree if anything I see because if not, I would ‘rage’ and thinks that I am also ‘raging’. Another stereotype, as her experiences do not apply to all.”
I’m staying out of that.
“They contain waste products. How can they not be disgusting? And most women don’t exactly look forward to periods.”
Cum? It’s usually clean if a guy or girl washes beforehand and considered a fun and safe product of the body. Some people have even tried consuming it
“If you ‘need’ sex (sex is not a ‘need’ unless you are a man unable to come from masturbation or wet dreams), then you are a pretty sad person indeed. What does that say for asexuals?”
Well, sexual release anyway, I should have said sexual activity. What can I say though, women have needs. It’s like needing to go to the toilet, you can hold it off as you need to be sociably acceptable, but you can’t hold it off forever, and you can’t expect couples and people everywhere to hold it off indefinitely because say they don’t want kids. It’s kind of cruel, don’t you think?
I don’t know what it says about asexuals, I really can’t say. I’m not going to say “OMG you’re missing out on this fun!” As that would be condescending. It would be nice not to not be concerned with “OMG these women should be strong proud honourable virgins!” as that is sort of condescending too.
There would still be ways to live. Everyone deserves a life unless they ruin the life of another. If you have that attitude, what does that say for deafblind children, or children/adults who cannot look after themselves at all (due to a mental condition or underdevelopment). And even when it comes to criminals, I still think they deserve the right to books and art (my government recently tried to ban both). It sounds cheesy, these stories, I know, but real life can be like that sometimes.
Well, then that would be her fault, and if that were the situation, I would hope I was given a better home. Yes, abuse is disgusting no matter what, but many people have risen above such a thing.
Again, they chose to have sex. The intelligent and most responsible thing would be to do that, but I know not everyone can resist lust. She is just selfish if she tries to get rid of it if or when it happens.
Of course I do. And while I know I cannot help them all, if I can at least give one, or two (I would still feel horrible about the children I’ve left behind) a good, loving home, I will had made some difference, even if it is so insignificant and will make no difference over all. It is because people are too selfish to adopt. Yes, you are free to have children the biological way, but I just wish people would consider adopting more. And besides, what’s to stop someone having a child biologically and from adoption. They are just as much your children. Your real parents are those who raise you. ‘Adopted’ should not be a prefix. I’m saying this because I’ve noticed they always separate children in those categories when naming them.
I know of this too, you know. He can walk away, just like the woman can give the child to someone else to raise. However, I am not being sexist here, as he’s is as much of a selfish prick as it would be with the genders the other way around. It takes two to tango, as they say.
Miscarriage is not on purpose, as you just stated. You cannot choose to miscarry. It is a tragic part of nature.
Ok, that is a point, and makes sense.
Urgh. They are not ‘being an ass’. Sure, they are letting themselves get carried away with that natural lust, but it is not evil. Because the man is not penetrated, the man’s body does not change so much. That’s not to say I don’t think lesbians can’t be raped, even if they used a dildo (but you’re kind of bisexual, then). Most men don’t feel pain either, whereas as a woman’s body to needs adjust to something being in there (yes, I know that some woman feel no pain, or have masturbated beforehand, but then you’re a non-virgin anyway). Yes, I know that you can tighten right back up afterwards if you don’t do it again for a while, but it does not change what has happened. I’m not saying that in a sexist way. I’m just saying that sex a big step in life (for men as well) and people treat it as if it is nothing. It can signal a commitment, it can result in the creation of new life, it can make you feel like a different person. Again, I’m not saying that applies to all, but those people who don’t feel even the slightest bit different are in denial.
Again, I never said it was not. Mind you, I tend to judge the severity of a physical or mental violation by how painful it is or what kinds of affects it had on the person’s mind, so I know that does not apply to all.
No, it is hypocrisy. Saying that one man can do all this stuff with you and another suddenly can’t because he’s no that man is hypocrisy because she has already done all that stuff, and it would make no difference doing it again. No, it is hypocrisy. Again, as I said, it makes the trauma no less real, but it is not for those reasons. It is her realising how foolish she was and how she cannot go back to the way things were before (no, not in regards to second partner, but her taking the step too early). She still deserves all the comfort and help she needs.
Again, as she made a commitment to someone, as well as violating her, that person is violating her commitment to that person, and if that person were to reject her afterwards, she or he would be almost as bad as the rapist. I say the same for those sick cunts who break up with someone or dump them because they were raped and therefore ‘someone got there first’. That ‘first’ was not her choice. And it was not really a first in the first place, as she did not consent.
Yes, I did, but that person still rushed in too fast, most likely. Some relationships just don’t work out, and that is a sad thing (I mean that truly, as all that love and connections ended up for naught because something happened). If someone wants to date a girl (or a guy) who has been with another, all the power to them, they are strong people, but it still hypocritical to claim cheating, even if it wasn’t the claimer’s fault that the relationship failed, as she already made a commitment to another.
All of these people are pretty good examples as well, as well those DA stamps and whatnot.
I haven’t had sex with him. It is still be no less sad, but I have not handled my body over to someone else (no, we don’t do the ‘I belong to you and you belong to me’ nonsense).
Yes, people make it in issue, a selfish issues. Incest and rape are not selfish reasons, even if it is still unfair to the new life. There is no hypocrisy or selfishness there.
“I also support it because of equality. Equality for all. And while it is not the reason why, I am also sick of the ‘feminists’ who scream that being anti-abortion is automatically ‘anti-women’ no matter what. Another example is a old secondary school friend of mine. She was born at roughly the same time as me (well, I was fourteen weeks early, her a month), and she weighed even less than me, and has/had worse eyesight (well, I was born blind and she could see, but hers became worse than mine from a very young age) and she made it through as well, she did those things as well. Babies are strong. “
While it is good that your friend also made it through, unfortunately not all babies are strong
Eg, www.news.com.au/lifestyle/heal…
There are positive outcomes, there are negative outcomes, and each case is individual.
“There would still be ways to live. Everyone deserves a life unless they ruin the life of another. If you have that attitude, what does that say for deafblind children, or children/adults who cannot look after themselves at all (due to a mental condition or underdevelopment). And even when it comes to criminals, I still think they deserve the right to books and art (my government recently tried to ban both). It sounds cheesy, these stories, I know, but real life can be like that sometimes.”
If I were talking about being simply blind alone, or deaf alone, it wouldn’t be so much of an issue. But blind as well as deaf? As well as being unable to walk? How much disability can an individual put up with? What if the kid was going to get cancer and would have a short life with nothing but pain?
“Well, then that would be her fault, and if that were the situation, I would hope I was given a better home. Yes, abuse is disgusting no matter what, but many people have risen above such a thing.
Again, they chose to have sex. The intelligent and most responsible thing would be to do that, but I know not everyone can resist lust. She is just selfish if she tries to get rid of it if or when it happens.”
It is far less selfish to stop something born before it can even feel pain than to bring a life into the world where it will know nothing but. She shouldn’t have gotten pregnant yes, but sometimes abortion is a kinder alternative.
“Of course I do. And while I know I cannot help them all, if I can at least give one, or two (I would still feel horrible about the children I’ve left behind) a good, loving home, I will had made some difference, even if it is so insignificant and will make no difference over all. It is because people are too selfish to adopt. Yes, you are free to have children the biological way, but I just wish people would consider adopting more. And besides, what’s to stop someone having a child biologically and from adoption. They are just as much your children. Your real parents are those who raise you. ‘Adopted’ should not be a prefix. I’m saying this because I’ve noticed they always separate children in those categories when naming them.”
This is true.
“Miscarriage is not on purpose, as you just stated. You cannot choose to miscarry. It is a tragic part of nature.”
Point being just because something is natural does not always make it so great. Caesareans are sometimes done to save the life of a baby. Are they natural?
“Urgh. They are not ‘being an ass’. Sure, they are letting themselves get carried away with that natural lust, but it is not evil.”
Okay, harassment is not “evil evil” but it’s still bad. A person can be sued if they do that. Besides, you don’t want someone you don’t care for deciding to try copping a feel from you, do you?
“Because the man is not penetrated, the man’s body does not change so much. That’s not to say I don’t think lesbians can’t be raped, even if they used a dildo (but you’re kind of bisexual, then).”
…..Rape however is evil.
“Most men don’t feel pain either, whereas as a woman’s body to needs adjust to something being in there (yes, I know that some woman feel no pain, or have masturbated beforehand, but then you’re a non-virgin anyway). Yes, I know that you can tighten right back up afterwards if you don’t do it again for a while, but it does not change what has happened. I’m not saying that in a sexist way. I’m just saying that sex a big step in life (for men as well) and people treat it as if it is nothing. It can signal a commitment, it can result in the creation of new life, it can make you feel like a different person. Again, I’m not saying that applies to all, but those people who don’t feel even the slightest bit different are in denial.”
Why does this “change” matter in regards to harassment or rape?
“Again, I never said it was not. Mind you, I tend to judge the severity of a physical or mental violation by how painful it is or what kinds of affects it had on the person’s mind, so I know that does not apply to all.”
While there are different situations that should be treated differently, this can get abused.
“No, it is hypocrisy. Saying that one man can do all this stuff with you and another suddenly can’t because he’s no that man is hypocrisy because she has already done all that stuff, and it would make no difference doing it again. No, it is hypocrisy. Again, as I said, it makes the trauma no less real, but it is not for those reasons. It is her realising how foolish she was and how she cannot go back to the way things were before (no, not in regards to second partner, but her taking the step too early).”
I do not think that is what her problem would be. That is what your problem is, and yours alone because for some reason you’re placing a lot of value into being a virgin and whether a person is rushing into a sex or not, it shouldn’t matter. No-one cares except for the odd religious nut. You know why? A woman’s body is her own. It is not hypocrisy to complain about getting raped, because what she did was never wrong in the first place, because it’s her body, and her right to do with it what she wants. She could be the next Paris Hilton but it would still be her body and her right.
For some reason you really “dislike” this change from having sex or think it is really immoral. Yeah, there might be a difference afterwards, but it’s not bad thing. You think it’s so bad, life after sex, and that the way things “were before” is so much better? I think you’re afraid of change, or at least that change. And for what? What do you THINK would happen if, for some odd reason, you did have consensual sex? I know you’re asexual, but say someone slipped you an aphrodisiac. You had an operation on your brain, whatever, just flex your imagination a bit. Humour me. You did it, the next morning, you go to the doctor, and you caught nothing after some tests. You didn’t become pregnant. What then? What different sort of person would you become?
“She still deserves all the comfort and help she needs. “
Yes she does.
“Again, as she made a commitment to someone, as well as violating her, that person is violating her commitment to that person, and if that person were to reject her afterwards, she or he would be almost as bad as the rapist. I say the same for those sick cunts who break up with someone or dump them because they were raped and therefore ‘someone got there first’. That ‘first’ was not her choice. And it was not really a first in the first place, as she did not consent.”
It would be wrong.
“Yes, I did, but that person still rushed in too fast, most likely. Some relationships just don’t work out, and that is a sad thing (I mean that truly, as all that love and connections ended up for naught because something happened). If someone wants to date a girl (or a guy) who has been with another, all the power to them, they are strong people, but it still hypocritical to claim cheating, even if it wasn’t the claimer’s fault that the relationship failed, as she already made a commitment to another. “
Cheating is bad not because it’s hypocritical, it’s bad because your partner wants you to love him or her. A person might have not had any partners before. Like you, you might not have had any partner before your BF. But if you went out and kissed someone while you agreed to be with him, you’d be cheating. If he went out and kissed a girl at the moment, he’d be cheating on you. If you however kissed someone before you even knew your BF, it wouldn’t be cheating. If you kiss your BF, you’re not cheating on your previous partner, because it would be over between you and that person. On the odd chance you have cheated on your BF, if he decided to kiss someone, he’s still be wrong, as he would be no better than you, (but you would also be in the wrong in the first place). If there is one thing that is hypocritical in this world, it is revenge.
“I haven’t had sex with him. It is still be no less sad, but I have not handled my body over to someone else (no, we don’t do the ‘I belong to you and you belong to me’ nonsense).”
That’s your prerogative.
We have charities over here for deafblind children. They can learn braille, explore the world through touch, have sensory toys. Those people can still enjoy life even if they cannot look after themselves. If they want to, on their own terms, die because it is too much for them, that is a whole different topic, but it is the decision and thoughts of the that person and that person alone who decides whether he or she likes his or her life.
Again, it is the person's choice whether their live is good or not.
I'm glad you think so.
But a C-section is not selfish, as you stated. Yes, we can all be selfish at times, but there is a level limit. For example, wishing to entertain ourselves, and asking for books, or technology, or whatever resources for it can be considered selfish. And there is always the survival instinct again, which can appear in negative ways. Yes, we thankfully have people who are dedicated to saving the life of others, but if a situation is really dire, we most likely will do anything we can to preserve ourselves.
Of course.
Again, of course.
She can just ignored it.
No, no, as I said to another person, you can be in a heterosexual, sexually-active relationship and still be feminist. Most married women are non-virigins, I know it is rare to become pregnant on the first attempt, etc. There is just a difference between 'meaningful sex' and 'throwing yourself at someone because you are letting lust control you'. I place a value on it in regards to romance and marriage because it makes sense. Again, people assume it for religious reasons. That's not the only reason, I've shown and observed. It is not fully 'her body' if she has given herself to another. Virgins have someone to lose (no, I am not saying rape is bad for the loss of virginity, but the heinous crime of someone taking and violating her body). A heterosexually non-virgin female does not have anything to violate unless she is engaged or married. She can sleep with as many or as few people she wants, but that does mean she can deny people the right to avoid her or have an opinion on her.
No, I don't think it's bad. I'm just saying there is some kind of change, no matter how small, and I (and I'm not the only one) just wishes people would be more careful and realize that it can only happen once. You can only give that gift to one person. And most people don't want it for 'religious' reasons.
Well, I would be a mother. I would not let that define me as a woman, but I know I would do my damnest to make sure they have a good life. The bit I would be terrified over would be the childbirth. I know it is natural, but I would also worry this tiny body of mine could not take it (I don't think I'm 'weak' as that is anti-feminist, as I am will fight and protect myself if needed), but that, along with the shit my mother went through with both me and my brother, doesn't exactly give me confidence, and she's of average height and no medical conditions to speak of. I would get a C-section. And I would hope Matt would be there to help. I know he would not abandon me.
Again, of course. It would be disgusting. Not to mention it just piles on to the suffering the victim already had. And not forgetting how much courage and trust it takes for someone to confess such a thing.
Well, I would not, as I respect him.
Oh, I should say, I do not think sex is the ultimate commitment, as I hope implied (but implied the former there).
No, it just because someone is 'in the past' it does not chance the fact that it happened it. That relationship failed, therefore, making what happened in it pointless. Yes, I believe former partners can be friends, but how can you be friends with someone you slept with? That is why I did not understand the whole 'friends with benefits' thing. You have been so very, very, close with that person. Yes, that second, or third (after that, you're just getting desperate), can be your 'one' (I do naively wish that our first adult relationships can be our 'ones', but life is cruel) but that person still cannot claim cheating.
I in fact dislike those people who think 'we haven't done anything yet, he/she must not love me!', and I'm guessing I'm not the only one in that regard? But that's another thing casual sex has let to.
Well, as you said, I suppose the kissing would count.
“Oh, silly me there. I meant to say that I/she was born fourteen weeks/a month early. No child could survive that early. Yes, you are right, and if those negative things happen, that is life, and we must mourn. However, even babies have the survival instinct. Ok, it seems to only manifest as 'if I make enough noise, someone will help me', but a sick infant will still want to survive. Ah, I saw a documentary about those twins. At least the parents gave them the chance. There is always exceptions.
We have charities over here for deafblind children. They can learn braille, explore the world through touch, have sensory toys. Those people can still enjoy life even if they cannot look after themselves. If they want to, on their own terms, die because it is too much for them, that is a whole different topic, but it is the decision and thoughts of the that person and that person alone who decides whether he or she likes her life.
Again, it is the person's choice whether their live is good or not”
Yes, it is that person’s decision. Although in cases where someone severely ill and is also incompetent, and there is not much hope for the person recovering, and their decision to continue living or continue suffering is unknown, the decision to end a life is left up to the family. In the case of an unborn child, it is best left up to the mother, which would be the said family.
“But a C-section is not selfish, as you stated. Yes, we can all be selfish at times, but there is a level limit. For example, wishing to entertain ourselves, and asking for books, or technology, or whatever resources for it can be considered selfish. And there is always the survival instinct again, which can appear in negative ways. Yes, we thankfully have people who are dedicated to saving the life of others, but if a situation is really dire, we most likely will do anything we can to preserve ourselves.”
Yet you believe abortion is selfish. Yet it isn’t selfish if you want to stop or prevent someone suffering.
Murder is wrong and selfish. Ending a life in the case of euthanasia or self-defence, is not.
“She can just ignored it.”
And if someone off the street decided to try feeling your boobs, are you going to ignore it and let him continue?
“No, no, as I said to another person, you can be in a heterosexual, sexually-active relationship and still be feminist. Most married women are non-virigins, I know it is rare to become pregnant on the first attempt, etc. There is just a difference between 'meaningful sex' and 'throwing yourself at someone because you are letting lust control you'.”
There is also a lot of grey area in between.
“I place a value on it in regards to romance and marriage because it makes sense. Again, people assume it for religious reasons. That's not the only reason, I've shown and observed. It is not fully 'her body' if she has given herself to another. Virgins have someone to lose (no, I am not saying rape is bad for the loss of virginity, but the heinous crime of someone taking and violating her body). A heterosexually non-virgin female does not have anything to violate unless she is engaged or married. She can sleep with as many or as few people she wants, but that does mean she can deny people the right to avoid her or have an opinion on her.”
She does have something she has lost, same as a virgin, as you described above “the heinous crime of someone taking and violating her body” but why do you think this doesn’t happen to non-virgins?
Why do you think “it is not fully her body” and that “it’s given to another” so completely?
What evidence can you provide that a woman does, would or should have her rights to her own body lost, that any sort of enslavement, either physical, mental or otherwise, starts the moment she has any sort of sexual activity, whether in a commitment or outside of one?
“No, I don't think it's bad. I'm just saying there is some kind of change, no matter how small, and I (and I'm not the only one) just wishes people would be more careful and realize that it can only happen once. You can only give that gift to one person. And most people don't want it for 'religious' reasons.”
Yes, but to believe the change is so severe that it’s hypocrisy when a non-virgin complains about rape?
“Well, I would be a mother. I would not let that define me as a woman, but I know I would do my damnest to make sure they have a good life. The bit I would be terrified over would be the childbirth. I know it unnatural, but I would also worry this tiny body of mine could not take it (I don't think I'm 'weak' as that is anti-feminist, as I am will fight and protect myself if needed), but that, along with the shit my mother went through with both me and my brother, doesn't exactly give me confidence, and she's of average height and no medical conditions to speak of. I would get a C-section. And I would hope Matt would be there to help. I know he would not abandon me.”
Yes, but what if you HAD sex, but DIDN’T become pregnant? Next day, go to doctor, no STD’s, no pregnancy. What would happen to you, do you think?
“Again, of course. It would be disgusting. Not to mention it just piles on to the suffering the victim already had. And not forgetting how much courage and trust it takes for someone to confess such a thing.”
Indeed
“Oh, I should say, I do not think sex is the ultimate commitment, as I hope implied (but implied the former there).
No, it just because someone is 'in the past' it does not chance the fact that it happened it. That relationship failed, therefore, making what happened in it pointless.”
I’m not saying former relationships end up being pointless or that it never happened. I’m saying what a person does in previous relationships doesn’t have any bearing on future ones in regards to cheating.
“Yes, I believe former partners can be friends, but how can you be friends with someone you slept with? That is why I did not understand the whole 'friends with benefits' thing. You have been so very, very, close with that person. Yes, that second, or third (after that, you're just getting desperate), can be your 'one' (I do naively wish that our first adult relationships can be our 'ones', but life is cruel) but that person still cannot claim cheating.”
I guess you’d have to ask someone who has slept with someone for that. It does happen though and it simply doesn’t affect other people the same it does with others.
“I in fact dislike those people who think 'we haven't done anything yet, he/she must not love me!', and I'm guessing I'm not the only one in that regard? But that's another thing casual sex has let to.”
You’re the only person I know of that considers what a person does before a relationship qualifies as cheating.
Why do you dislike them?
“Well, as you said, I suppose the kissing would count.”
Yep.
“I also forgot to mention a bit in regards to pregnancy - what if my allergies or conditions were to be passed down as well? I know they say it's fifty percent, but it's still fifty percent. If my child had those conditions, it would be all my fault. Yes, that child might be able to live life normally despite them, but I would still feel guilty that they had them.”
I dread the thought of having a child myself. It’s times like that I consider getting my tubes tied. But I’m forever alone anyway so why worry? But I asked you to stretch your imagination, so I’ll stretch mine in return.
If I had a child that had the same problems that I or my family has, or I passed on some disability, I’d have to live with that guilt. It would eat away it me, I guess, but there will be ways in life to deal with that guilt. In guess one way would be to channel it into helping the child cope with whatever problem it gets. If the guilt got too severe, I would have to seek help as I would not only have to look after my own well-being but the well-being of the kid who would depend on me, and I would have to realise this.
I don’t know if that would apply to you
No. That child has yet to even begins its life. It deserves a chance, not to be murdered by some heartless cow. The father, if willing, can take the child, or again, it can be given to another family. Just as the mother can keep the child if the father is a heartless bastard.
But again, you don’t know if that person will suffer. And that person who wants to end that life again was a foetus once. Euthanasia is the choice of the person wishing it unless they cannot give consent, then indeed it is the choice of the family. That foetus has yet to begin life in the real world. Again, unless the pregnancy could cause the mother’s death, or it was the result of rape, there is no reason to abort.
That is different. That is physical. Words from a stranger who knows nothing of you can be ignored.
Because she already gave herself to someone. Yes, she will suffer physically because that attacker obviously cares nothing for her, or sometimes, does not know what they are doing (it can happen, but the attacker would still be at fault), but she is not losing anything physically. Well, because sex, for women, tends to be more about emotions than physical thing (again, women who can be completely without emotions is a cold being), and due to the way sex works, she be very open and exposed to her partner, male or female. It is not slavery within commitment. Yes, I know sex is about lust, but again, it can be romantic in a committed relationship. But again, casual sex, swingers, BDSM, exist.
It’s not ‘severe’, that’s too harsh a word. Again, she already let another take he, and there being another, unless she is engaged or married, makes no difference in the long run. Her mind however, is a different matter, as we know.
Well, I’d probably just think “Well, fuck.” As then I would to give myself those names and insults. I’m good at insulting myself, after all.
Well, it does to some people, including me. Some people (not for religious reasons) think that sex outside of marriage, even with the person they are going to marry is betraying their future husband/wife (or only husband, because we all know lesbians are just trying to get attention -_-) or not being the strength and respect to wait until they are wed. I’m not that extreme, especially in regards to the ‘with the same person part’ and the fiancé/fiance is just as guilty for that last part as well. Some people just don’t like someone having a ‘sexual past’ to thin about. And no, it’s not because they ‘worry they might not be good enough’, unlike most ‘feminists’ say (I’m not saying you think this, I’m just giving an example of such attitudes again).
But other people are free to view such things however they like. To have our own opinions, no matter what, is a form of equality.
Again, I don’t dislike them. I don’t like the attitude and selfishness.
:Nod:
Forever alone? Now, now, why would you say that? As sappy, pathetic, and naïve as this sounds, you will find someone. Yes, I dread to think that there are people who have existed that, no matter how much they tried, never found that speical someone, but no-one deserves to die alone. No-one. For some reason, I can even extend that to the lowest and sickest of criminals. Seeing their loved ones, if they have any, might just make them think before they lose cognitive thinking, die and go to hell. That’s a sick thing right? To think that they deserve someone so…kind.
Eh, um, sorry
Ah, so I could use my experiences to help them? How logical (not sarcsasm). I mean sure, they could be a whiney little, “But you’re not me! You don’t understaaaannnddd!” but I would do my best to dispel that attitude. But of course. I would never want to be in a situation where I could not look after them. Also, as…old fashioned, maybe a little anti-feminist as this sounds, if I could raise a child, adopted or biological, I will made another achievement – I would add to the people who prove that disabilities does not mean one cannot be a good parent.
But that’s a long, long time away, after lots of training and confidence building.