• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

Stop Shooting Ourselves in the Nuts, or, A Reasoned Discussion of Male Responses to F

Jam Stunna

Writer of Fortune
BRoomer
Joined
May 6, 2006
Messages
6,450
Location
Hartford, CT
3DS FC
0447-6552-1484
Link to original post: [drupal=5131]Stop Shooting Ourselves in the Nuts, or, A Reasoned Discussion of Male Responses to Female Sexuality[/drupal]



I wrote this last October, so it's a little out of date.

A few weeks ago, the story broke that Sarah Palin had a one night stand with Glen Rice in 1987. At the time I couldn't think of anything I cared less about, and believe me, I tried. As I made my internet news rounds though, I became surprised at just how many different organizations were covering the story, and at how absurd some of that coverage was. A few days later, my brother sent me this picture of Michelle Bachman in a pretty funny, but suggestive pose

Don't get me wrong; this is not a blog to defend these two nutcase right-wing harpies. Instead, I think that both of these instances (and hundreds of others) illustrate how we treat female sexuality. The coverage of Palin's sex life carries an implicit tone of disapproval: Gasp! An adult woman had consensual sex?! Stop the presses! I won't complain about that for too long though. Yes, we are all aware that there's a double standard in how male and female sexuality are portrayed. And yes, it would be a good thing for everyone if we treated men and women equally in all things, from sex to workplace pay and everything in between. Let's just concede those things to be true. My argument is this: it actually hurts men to stigmatize female sexuality. How, you ask?

Time for some lame anecdotal evidence!

I was talking to a female friend of mine recently, and we were discussing relationships. I told her that one of my goals for the month of October was to finally start dating, and to achieve that ultimate of all experiences, birthday sex (I think conjugal visit sex may be slightly more ultimate, but prison, so yeah). She said to me, "Is it wrong if that's one of my goals too? Does that make me a ****?" I told her it didn't, but she seemed less than convinced.

The point of this little story? Here we have an attractive, single woman looking to make the most out of her birthday. Despite the fact that she likes sex, LIKE WE ALL DO, she's probably not going to act on that urge because of how she's been made to feel about her own sexuality. The Palin and Bachman and dozens of other examples of female sexual stigmatization play right into the attitude that sex is wrong. And if women aren't having sex because they've been made to feel bad about it, guess who else isn't having sex?

That's right: men. Some guy might have gotten lucky on my friend's birthday. Looks a little unlikely now. Basically, we're not going to find women who are open and honest about their sexuality if we call them *****s every time that they are open. I'm not suggesting that one-night stands are necessarily a good idea, but we do all sorts of things that aren't good ideas. And besides, whether we're talking about someone you met in a bar or your fiance, sex is going to be better if the woman doesn't feel like a **** because she gives head or rides well. These are actual things that I've heard; it's the height of insanity that someone should be made to feel bad for giving someone else pleasure.

Do you want to get laid? Chances are you'll have a better shot if your potential sex partners don't think that giving you what you want makes them dirty.
I come back to this because of a discussion I had at work today. I was discussing the movie Think Like a Man with a coworker, and the reasons why I wouldn't be seeing it. The movie is based on the book Act Like a Lady, Think Like a Man by Steve Harvey. I haven't read the book, but I've heard enough about it to know that it's something that I'm not interested in reading (aside from the fact that it's not targeted at me in the first place).

The discussion at work centered around a particular anecdote from the book, where Harvey councils women who give it up on the first date, essentially telling them that no man will take them seriously if they have sex with them right off the bat. It sparked an interesting and humorous debate, but I was actually shocked at how readily so many people in our debate took Harvey's statement as axiomatic: a woman who has sex on the first date is not worth your respect. When we asked why this was true, none of the people who agreed with the claim had any substantive reason for feeling that way. They just did, because it was something that they'd been taught, and it had been confirmed over and over again throughout their lives.

I feel that this is problematic for several reasons, not the least of which is that we define the woman's worth by her (un)willingness to engage in consensual sexual activity on the first date, but we don't do the same for men. After all, don't both parties want it? Yet only one party suffers any stigma from the act, and it's always the woman who does. The above section in quotes is a tongue-in-cheek way to draw attention to this discrepancy, but after the conversation I had today, I felt a more direct approach is necessary. Female sexuality is still stigmatized as bad, and women who have sex are characterized as dirty, immoral or worse. You can see it at play in Harvey's book; you can see it at play in Rush Limbaugh's attack on Sarah Fluke and the wider birth control debate that's been going on in the U.S. at large; you can see it at play in any number of interactions between men and women. And when you take this kind of attitude to its extreme, you get craziness like this. Everyone should be selective of who they choose to share their bodies with, because health concerns are not male or female. Yet for some reason we continue to assign all shame and guilt to women when it comes to sex, and that's wrong.
 

Teran

Through Fire, Justice is Served
Super Moderator
Premium
BRoomer
Joined
Oct 23, 2008
Messages
37,165
Location
Beastector HQ
3DS FC
3540-0079-4988
The most satisfying meals are the ones that took great effort to make.

The most prized possessions are the ones you had to work hard to obtain, be it through saving up money or other means which required patience, dedication etc etc

Despite what most men will pretend, deep down they see women as nothing more than inferior and objects of conquest and pleasure. Nobody buys some ****ty décor from the thrift store and shows it off to everyone, but they'd gladly hang something like the Mona Lisa up for all to behold.

Nobody wants sloppy seconds easy pickings on their arm, they want a conquered princess to show off to the world, the fact that only you have earned the impossible privilege of defiling this divine being.

I don't follow this train of thought but that's only because I don't find women attractive, and since I objectify pretty much everyone I'm attracted to, I'm pretty sure I'd be sexist if I were straight. Kinda begs the question as to whether it's sexism or just male ego.
 

Holder of the Heel

Fiat justitia, pereat mundus
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
8,850
Location
Alabama
NNID
Roarfang
3DS FC
1332-7720-7283
Switch FC
6734-2078-8990
There are a plethora of reasons why things are the way they are with that. I am not saying I think of women in the mentioned way, but I do see how women get a harder time with it because people justify it by saying that women are not nearly as sexual creatures as men. Men are sick nasty, even if they don't act on it and don't ooze testosterone, but women function a lot differently biologically. Their fantasies involve more of affection, which is in stark contrast with the domination plaguing the minds of men, and they also biologically have to treat sexual activity differently because to them, there are much larger consequences and mentalities to it, meaning men just want a sexy bod and women want more along the lines of status and ability to take care of her or any children. So again, when people think of women doing that a lot or quickly, they find that to be a lot less justifiable than when guys are that way, not exactly that people think that sexually crazed men are better than sexually crazed women in terms of morals, just that one is "expected" more than the other.

I don't really care what people with the horizontal hokey-pokey, they may do whatever they like. There aren't really *****s in my mind, just people who attribute different meanings and value to sexual activity.
 

Mota

"The snake, knowing itself, strikes swiftly"
Joined
Jul 19, 2008
Messages
4,063
Location
Australia | Melb
I completely agree and found myself saying the exact same thing a few years back.
And yes we do appreciate something more if we invested more time and effort into it.

The average adolescent male wants some action, yet will start calling the very women who are consensual of said actions as ****s and *****s. It's pretty much counter productive :p
It's like wanting pie, but everytime you smelt a pie you punched it in the face. (Forgiveness please)


Although the common thought is that men are always up for sex and women hold the power over when sex occurs. That a male has to put in more effort to find sex whereas women can potentially get it easier, if not whenever they want.
Leading to such things as: "A key that opens many locks is a good key...A lock that is opened by many keys is a bad lock"
I think it's more a way for men to keep a woman exclusively to themselves. We're very territorial like that :)
 

The Great Gonzales

Smash Ace
Joined
Jul 7, 2007
Messages
558
Location
Springfield,MA
i honestly dont a **** whether a woman gives it up easy or not. If she does it means she finds me really actractive, i consider it a compliment. If she doest than i start to think maeby she's a little prude when it comes to her sexuality. Honestly who cares at the end of the day people need sex, and they also want to fall in love with someone. There 2 different things so dont expect to fall in love with every single woman or expect a woman to cater to your tastes by playing hard to get, or not playing hard to get. Were all *****s and perverts, some people just lie about it and pretend to be saints
 

Teran

Through Fire, Justice is Served
Super Moderator
Premium
BRoomer
Joined
Oct 23, 2008
Messages
37,165
Location
Beastector HQ
3DS FC
3540-0079-4988
WELL OMNICRON BROTHER FROM WHAT I HEARD THAT CRUISERWEIGHT TERAN WILL TAKE CARE OF YOU IF YOU COME TO LONDON IF YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING DUDEJACK[COLLAPSE="[img]lolololololololololololoolblankpost[/img]"][/COLLAPSE]
 

Ussi

Smash Legend
Joined
Mar 9, 2008
Messages
17,147
Location
New Jersey (South T_T)
3DS FC
4613-6716-2183
I'm against sex before marriage (religion morals) so i view both men and women with a lower standard if they can't control themselves if they have sex before marriage.

I think the main issue is that the world is still male influenced. Men don't care about other men having sex, unless its with someone they want, but they just think badly of the woman because he probably thinks "she was easy if he got her"
 

Lord Chair

Smash Master
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
3,229
Location
Cheeseland, Europe
Also having a thing for underage boys doesn't equate to pedophilia. Having a thing for boys because they look like preteens is pedophilia.
Perhaps Omicron does in fact look like a prepubescent boy and he figures he will no longer be once he has a couple of extra years on his record.
 

Teran

Through Fire, Justice is Served
Super Moderator
Premium
BRoomer
Joined
Oct 23, 2008
Messages
37,165
Location
Beastector HQ
3DS FC
3540-0079-4988
I was just gonna show him London but apparently everyone has to put their minds in the gutter omg **** all of you

Disgusting people

I don't sleep with foreigners.
 

PurDi

Smash Journeyman
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
342
Location
I don't really know anymore...
I'm against sex before marriage (religion morals) so i view both men and women with a lower standard if they can't control themselves if they have sex before marriage.

I think the main issue is that the world is still male influenced. Men don't care about other men having sex, unless its with someone they want, but they just think badly of the woman because he probably thinks "she was easy if he got her"
Why no sex before marriage?

Before you just say religious beliefs, open up to what I'm saying. I'm not trying to change your ways, just genuinely curious.

As much as you want it to not be a driving factor in the marriage, sex is. It's one of the most important things... Without a good (or even decent) sex life, relationships tend to fail. I guess my point is you may be weighing premarital sex over divorce and divorce sure seems a lot worse.

Also, you should never look down on people because of having premarital sex. Just because your religion states that you shouldn't (can't) do it, doesn't mean all of them do. It's like looking down on someone that smokes or drinks or isn't interested in video games. Just because they're different, they're not undoubtedly wrong.
 

Falconv1.0

Smash Master
Joined
Feb 15, 2008
Messages
3,511
Location
Talking **** in Cali
You know those religious morals about no sex before marriage came about when marriage was more a ****ing contract between two families to trade **** than "love" or whatever the hell, right?

But hey whatever just trying to actually make sense as to why one would so foolishly try to deny basic ****ing desires because some old sand people said so.
 

Teran

Through Fire, Justice is Served
Super Moderator
Premium
BRoomer
Joined
Oct 23, 2008
Messages
37,165
Location
Beastector HQ
3DS FC
3540-0079-4988
Let's try not to make this about religion.
 

Falconv1.0

Smash Master
Joined
Feb 15, 2008
Messages
3,511
Location
Talking **** in Cali
Let's try not to make this about religion.
^Teran on every thread ever.

But my point is I want some actual ****ing reasoning from Ussi, if his only grounds for it is WELL THIS BOOK TOLD ME SO then wow **** somehow I have trouble seeing a reason to respect that opinion WHEN IT'S NOT EVEN REALLY SOMETHING HE FORMED HIMSELF AFTER EVALUATING HIS BELIEFS.
 

Shorts

Zef Side
Premium
Joined
Jun 8, 2009
Messages
9,609
3DS FC
3136-6583-3704
I'm against sex before marriage (religion morals) so i view both men and women with a lower standard if they can't control themselves if they have sex before marriage.
Ew. We, aren't friends.
 

Teran

Through Fire, Justice is Served
Super Moderator
Premium
BRoomer
Joined
Oct 23, 2008
Messages
37,165
Location
Beastector HQ
3DS FC
3540-0079-4988
^Teran on every thread ever.

But my point is I want some actual ****ing reasoning from Ussi, if his only grounds for it is WELL THIS BOOK TOLD ME SO then wow **** somehow I have trouble seeing a reason to respect that opinion WHEN IT'S NOT EVEN REALLY SOMETHING HE FORMED HIMSELF AFTER EVALUATING HIS BELIEFS.
Ew. We, aren't friends.
 

Venus of the Desert Bloom

Cosmic God
Super Moderator
Premium
BRoomer
Writing Team
Joined
Jul 30, 2007
Messages
15,418
NNID
VenusBloom
3DS FC
0318-9184-0547
One thing I don't understand why everyone is losing their **** over what Ussi said. So what if he has religious morals. He is entitled to them and has the right to defend them or say "**** you, that's what I believe" to every attacking him.

I personally don't have anything wrong with a women who is sexually open. My girlfriend is pretty closed off about sexual matters and it's very personal to here but that is the culture she grew up. So I understand.

My problem is when a women uses sex to play games/mind ****/revenge/or do all around *****y things. I am not accusing girlfriends/wives who, in exchange for wanting a nice necklace, will do a fantasy their boyfriend/husband has always wanted. Mine comes with using their sex to further their own agendas can can potential harm someone; physically or emotionally.

It also happens with guys so it's not only girls. However, girls know how to twirl men around their fingers. So now, a girl liking sex is not a *****. She is a human being.
 

Holder of the Heel

Fiat justitia, pereat mundus
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
8,850
Location
Alabama
NNID
Roarfang
3DS FC
1332-7720-7283
Switch FC
6734-2078-8990
One thing I don't understand why everyone is losing their **** over what Ussi said. So what if he has religious morals. He is entitled to them and has the right to defend them or say "**** you, that's what I believe" to every attacking him.
The people understand that, though, that has little to do with their questions. Having the right to possess any opinion or stance you want does not mean picking misguided or nonsensical ones correct, it simply means you can have any opinion you want period. Do you understand question mark?
 

Venus of the Desert Bloom

Cosmic God
Super Moderator
Premium
BRoomer
Writing Team
Joined
Jul 30, 2007
Messages
15,418
NNID
VenusBloom
3DS FC
0318-9184-0547
The people understand that, though, that has little to do with their questions. Having the right to possess any opinion or stance you want does not mean picking misguided or nonsensical ones correct, it simply means you can have any opinion you want period. Do you understand question mark?
People have as much right to question someones stance they make as the person who made the comment. Bearing that in mind, you guys have every right to question Ussi but, judging from the comments, any credibility he had has automatically been thrown away since he believes in "sand people".

However, my frustration stems from people automatically labeling people who follow/closely follow "religious morals" as loony and idiotic with little to no sense. While I personally do not follow any type of religion, I find it increasingly annoying when people throw "sensible" religious people with "non-sensible" religious people and lump them altogether. Yes, every religion has their lunatics, ***-holes, and zealots but, from my point of view, everyone seems to use religions, Christianity in particular, as a focal point to try and crush to death. When someone it outed as a Christian or a religious person, they are automatically seen as a "lunatic", their intelligence is questioned, and any creditability they had previously is down the drain DESPITE standing up for what they believe in wholeheartedly.

Sorry to turn this thread towards religion since that is not the main point but I see it ridiculous for Ussi to being slammed for not only answering the original question but also for his religious beliefs.
 

Falconv1.0

Smash Master
Joined
Feb 15, 2008
Messages
3,511
Location
Talking **** in Cali
People have as much right to question someones stance they make as the person who made the comment. Bearing that in mind, you guys have every right to question Ussi but, judging from the comments, any credibility he had has automatically been thrown away since he believes in "sand people".
Sand people being people in the middle east. People who wrote the laws he's following years ago in a society completely different than ours when it comes to how marriage was handled, so yes, I expect an explanation from him past "religion morals". It's not a jab at the religion it's a jab at his terrible explanation for why he apparently looks down on the vast majority of society.

Also when someone says they look down on people for ****ing before getting married due to, you know, THEIR RELIGION, THEY KINDA OPEN THEMSELVES UP TO CRITICISM THAT WILL OFTEN QUESTION THE VALIDITY OF THAT RELIGION'S CLAIM OF WHAT IS AND ISN'T RIGHT, BROSLICE.

Edit-And once again I'd to point out I'm not making a religious argument here, I want his own personal reasons, I want him to prove he actually has put thought into this and has a good reason to view us all as pathetic horny ****s.
 

Holder of the Heel

Fiat justitia, pereat mundus
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
8,850
Location
Alabama
NNID
Roarfang
3DS FC
1332-7720-7283
Switch FC
6734-2078-8990
I see what you mean. They're comments were probably more so directed at the manner in which the position was stated. I don't want to derail this into religion either, but I would suggest not looking down on people who "can't control themselves". You'll appear self-righteous, and get these kind of reactions. Not to mention, you'll be putting yourself on a pedestal above a LOT of people. Pride, something Christianity finds the root of all evil, sometimes is given off paradoxically with many Christian attitudes, such as this gives off.
 

Falconv1.0

Smash Master
Joined
Feb 15, 2008
Messages
3,511
Location
Talking **** in Cali
I see what you mean. They're comments were probably more so directed at the manner in which the position was stated. I don't want to derail this into religion either, but I would suggest not looking down on people who "can't control themselves". You'll appear self-righteous, and get these kind of reactions. Not to mention, you'll be putting yourself on a pedestal above a LOT of people. Pride, something Christianity finds the root of all evil, sometimes is given off paradoxically with many Christian attitudes, such as this gives off.
This guy is getting it! You should be more like this guy right now.

.____.
 

Metal Overlord

Smash Hero
Joined
Aug 2, 2011
Messages
6,794
Location
Nawf Side
One thing I don't understand why everyone is losing their **** over what Ussi said. So what if he has religious morals. He is entitled to them and has the right to defend them or say "**** you, that's what I believe" to every attacking him.
Wasn't gonna get in on this, but I gotta comment on this part. Where exactly are you getting that people are "losing their ****" over what Ussi said? Only like 2 or 3 people really responded to his post and both of them seemed relatively calm, at least from what I gather.

But even if someone were to flip their ****, when you make a statement like "I'm against sex before marriage (religion morals) so i view both men and women with a lower standard if they can't control themselves if they have sex before marriage.", who could honestly blame someone for taking offense to that statement? Religion is already a controversial topic in the first place, but combine that with the viewpoint above, then you're REALLY opening a can of worms. Not only does that part come off as self-righteous and disdainful, basically saying that any person who has premarital sex don't have any self-control when it comes to sex and that he'll think less of people who do this, it's also broad so it can apply to a lot of people. Ussi should be able to defend himself by explaining his reasoning for what he said and why he feels that way because what he said could really piss people off here who might have actually had premarital sex before in their life and cause them to go off on him.

With that said, I don't think anyone is here denying that Ussi is entitled to his own beliefs, I think the problem here is that it seems like Ussi's opinion of premarital sex could be almost entirely founded on his religious morals and not necessarily his own. Because of that, people want to see if he has any other reasons for feeling the way he does other than his religious beliefs, to confirm whether there's more to his opinion on premarital sex than what he's already said, or if he basically only said what he said because of his religion

Just my 2 cents, of course. Maybe others have already covered all or most of my points without making a wall of text, but this is how I feel on the matter
 

Sucumbio

Smash Giant
Moderator
Writing Team
Joined
Oct 7, 2008
Messages
8,200
Location
Icerim Mountains
Interesting read...

When we asked why this was true, none of the people who agreed with the claim had any substantive reason for feeling that way. They just did, because it was something that they'd been taught, and it had been confirmed over and over again throughout their lives.
This stood out to me. In matters of sex, do you not think that going by what you're taught, and what you observe over and over, is in fact the -best- way to learn? Sex ed (taught) and failed relationships (repeated confirmations) ... I actually can't think of any other way you would learn safely. What I'm getting at is that this "stigma" you identified is to me, more of an issue for people who have less experience in dating.

Think of it like this...

Take 1:

You go to a bar to meet someone for a date. Result - you either find someone or you don't. You will most likely hook up if someone takes interest (have sex). This would technically be "the first date." Why will you most likely have sex with someone whom takes interest in you? Because that's WHY you're there. You're not going to bars or clubs looking for your life-long mate, you're looking for sexual gratification.

Take 2:

You meet someone either IRL (like at work, your sister's birthday party, whatever) or online (on a message board, or through chat, etc) - NOT in a place akin to take 1 (so not a bar or club, not a dating site)- you chat or talk, get to know each other, finally get the courage up to ask the other on an actual date, dinner and movie, a walk by the lakeside, whatever it may be. If the two of you find yourselves in the sack after this first date, what does that mean about your future relationship? What does that mean about who you are as people going into this? Are you ****s? Are you just comfortable with your sexuality? Just being adults about it all?

The point here (and Teran somehow did actually touch on this before going all hulk hogan on us) is that "a keeper" is someone whose interests are deeper than sexual gratification. It's not about a time limit of abstinence. It's not about going 'round the bases in order and slowly. It's about understanding the intentions of the couple... if all you want is sex, if that's what's most important, can you really blame someone for not wanting to vest their precious time and effort into that person? This lesson is what is taught. Don't go for fast women, they'll use you and then dump you. The same should be said of men! They'll use you, then dump you if they try to get in your pants right away.

Is it true for all? Obviously not. There is always exceptions to rules of life. But the overwhelming majority of couples who have sex right away do not succeed. I would venture to say there is a scientific reason for this, but that would be getting into the biological imperative for monogamy vs. multiple partners, etc. and I really don't have the time to do the research, but it just stands to reason for me from a biological standpoint that successful human evolution counts on monogamy and the family unit, and casual sex and promiscuity is somehow a traitor to those concepts.
 

camerino1

Smash Lord
Joined
Mar 20, 2011
Messages
1,295
Location
Sudbury, Ontario
Sucumbio has said something that both myself and my boyfriend agree in. I talked to him for a good 2 months prior to saying how I felt, and he was the one that said it first. This relationship can last, not because he's the single most attractive person alive or because he knows how to make me feel amazing while we're doing "stuff", it's because we could see each other as life-long friends. We have so much in common, and we didn't just meet to have fun with each other. I started talking to him because I saw that we had a HUGE amount of similar interests. We play the same games, listen to the same music, have very similar morals. It all adds up, but I also believe that had we done something sexual right away, it would never have worked.

If we were to have done that, that would have been all we knew of each other and then we would have kept asking. It also eliminates a lot of mystery right away, which I know that I really enjoy some mystery (and I'm sure most of us do). I wanted an emotional relationship long before a physical one with him, which is, I think, the reason why we'll last. Yes, I do enjoy "fun" stuff, but I was looking for a connection beyond that first. I also think this is even more rare, considering we're both men, and men are usually looking for sex really fast. I say that I got lucky that he wasn't like that, and I'm lucky that I'm not like that.
 

Falconv1.0

Smash Master
Joined
Feb 15, 2008
Messages
3,511
Location
Talking **** in Cali
Wasn't gonna get in on this, but I gotta comment on this part. Where exactly are you getting that people are "losing their ****" over what Ussi said? Only like 2 or 3 people really responded to his post and both of them seemed relatively calm, at least from what I gather.
Calm? CALM? YOU THINK I'M ****ING CALM I'LL FU-

You know, I wonder if he'd be getting the same defense if he said he doesn't approve of gay people being together due to "religion morals". But hey whatever we're never allowed to criticize people for what they say ever now no matter how elitist and illogical it seems to us cuz we're DENYING HIS RELIGIOUS FREEEDAAAAWM by doing so, obv.

BTW I also don't hate you right now, Metal Overlord!
 

Teran

Through Fire, Justice is Served
Super Moderator
Premium
BRoomer
Joined
Oct 23, 2008
Messages
37,165
Location
Beastector HQ
3DS FC
3540-0079-4988
Yeah next person to even mention religion will be infracted.
 

Venus of the Desert Bloom

Cosmic God
Super Moderator
Premium
BRoomer
Writing Team
Joined
Jul 30, 2007
Messages
15,418
NNID
VenusBloom
3DS FC
0318-9184-0547
Sorry Hulk, I didn't mean to go on the religious rant. Kind of a stressful day and it was something that's been on on my mind lately -___-'

As I said before, my own problem is women who constantly abuse their sexuality and the ability to lure guys with it. It is making their sexuality a product or commodity (I am not necessarily pointing out to prostitutes or sex workers in this). It is extremely the opposite of sexual freedom because they feel the need to get anywhere in life; they have to let someone cop a feel or sleep with them for a night.

Sadly, this happens to both good and bad people and it's a sad state of affairs.
 

KassandraNova

Smash Master
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
4,167
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio
3DS FC
4167-5079-1850
Well, as far as I know, women are supposed to be selective by nature when it comes to finding a mate. A woman's primal instincts is to find a guy who will actually stick around, because you know, when women go around ****ing everything, WE pay the ultimate price, we have a kid. So when it comes to having sex, we should be selective, and not just do it for whatever reason because one bad choice can lead to kid. To a life. That's why it's considered taboo for girls to do that. What if they have a child with someone they don't love or what if at that bday bash, she got pregnant, how does she explain that to her kid? Yeah I just wanted some d*** on my bday and then you happened. Enjoy your ******* child and the joys of single parenting.
Since women have the ability to reproduce we suffer the most if a screw up happens during sex. We carry the ****ing mistake in our stomachs for months, while guys can just write something off as a simple child support check, no women have to deal with it. That's why. That's why girls shouldn't behave that way. Because its ****ing dangerous. Wreck less, and irresponsible.

:phone:
 

Jam Stunna

Writer of Fortune
BRoomer
Joined
May 6, 2006
Messages
6,450
Location
Hartford, CT
3DS FC
0447-6552-1484
I'm mostly content to read the replies and not respond to them (since I'm not trying to change anyone's mind, I just want to see what people think), but I have a real problem with biological determinism as an explanation for sexual stigmatization.
 
Top Bottom