|
|
|
|
|
| Sex versus love
Posted: 11/4/2009 8:25:40 AM | Ya know.. truth is truth. I actually "get" where ONLY is coming from. I mean it isnt like young men.. and even older men are "in love" with their hand is it? Isnt THAT having sex?
However, instead of jumping into the whole attackmode of this fray.. I suggest some of you go rent "Bedazzled" where Brendan Frasier makes a pact with the devil to try and win over a woman who cant/wont give him the time of day.
He keeps making incomplete-subject-to-different-interpretations wishes that put him trying to win over the Object' desiree.
ONE of his wishes is where he has read her diary where she has a FANTASY harlequin-esque dream and writes she wants a SENSITIVE man. WHOOOOOSH they are on a beach and he is EMOTING about how BEAUTIFUL the sunset is whimper whimper whimper.. The eye-rolling look on her face is classic.. THEN.. some surfer-bad-boy-dudes come over and ask her DIRECTLY if she wants to go have some beers and Bang the three of em in their Van. She jumps up and says.. YEAH.. and goes off
To my sometimes-forum-adversary ONLY.. I gotta tell you, the number of guys these days who DO actually believe they need, or have actually GONE to that place of FEELING like they were in love to have sex has grown exponentially.
And it's why women STILL go after those "Badboys". The loving, sensitive, HARLEQUIN-romantic guy.. gets attention AFTER she has been kicked to the curb and left with 2 kids.. THEN his sensitive romantic side is called upon. To pick up the Toaster-leavins of the badboys.
EMOTIONALLY.. women want the semblance of romance
Physically.. their panties get moist when Brando, Dean, Diceman, Willis, heck I'll even throw in Fonzie walk in..
Ya know.. it all makes me wonder.. Are women all GENETICALLY bi-polar with their sexuality like this?
The above message, while having some validity and thought behind it, was also brought to you by TongueNCheek productions..
I'm 1kindman4u and I approve this message | |
|
| Sex versus love
Posted: 11/4/2009 8:25:47 AM | When I have sex with the person I love, I'm making love. Sex without love is nothing more than a mechanical, functional act Nope! Disagree WHOLEHEARTEDLY!!! Have had one-night-stand-rip-off-those-clothes faster-than-a-speeding bullet variety as well as the gazing-into each-others-eyes-spiritual union, variety... Sex is sex is sex...It is US who imbue it with all of the meaning -, repressions, hangups, and perspectives that WE ourselves bring to it...
Thanks. You've made what I'm about to do, soooo much easier...
Verity does not tell it like it really is. He tells it from his own slant on things.
Dee4166 is one example of living proof of my "slant" on female sexuality.
She is a woman, and has the exact same attitude about sex that I and many other people do. Sex is sex, and love is love.
Sex is better when you do it with someone you love, but it can still be great even in the absence of love.
He has so many holes in his opinions.
Really? I doubt it. My opinions are objective, and based on not only my personal experiences, but having studied sexology.
But let's test your opinions....
Real life: Women and men ARE different in every way.
Patently false. Once again, the "reality" you set forth proves to be fallacy.
Dee4166 is once again, one of many examples of living proof.
Individuals are different. That's what makes them individuals. Not genders.
Men are not attracted to women acting like men in the dating/mating rituals.
Patently false. See previous example.
They may like the attention initially, but it soon wears off.
Sex too early is nice for most men, but their attention wanders after a short while.
Patently false. Subjective.
Anyone who believes in the early sex route is playing Russian roulette with cupid's arrows.
Rhetoric.
Why do you think I don't indulge in sex right away? When this man acted this way, I was NOT going to give him a second look. He had to work hard at attracting me the right way...and I made sure he did. Those three months were not about me playing games.
That's non sequitur.
You are playing games. Only a fool wouldn't see that.
But..the issue here is this. What are women doing that made him feel he could say something like that to me initially?
The issue is, that you don't get it.
You really don't get it.
Probably never will.
Women have nothing to do with his behaviour. He's just being "him".
Women (at large) are not anymore responsible for his behaviour, than children are responsible for a pedophile's behaviour.
But, when someone is tireless about expounding his opinions in such a way that he is now diagnosing "fear of sex" because a person doesn't think or act the way that he does, then I give him the real deal.
You haven't given us anything other than soundbites of your rhetoric, which appears to be based on grade 9 biology, and your personal experiences.
You haven't the foggiest grasp of psychosexual development, and yet you feel that you are at the forefront of knowledge on human sexuality.
Yupp...these forums are sometimes an endless source of amusement...
Myself, I'm looking for a GROWN man, who has learned how to treat women with a modicum of respect and dignity because of who HE is all of the time!!! Someone who I don't have to "train" in any way...I have a dog for that!!! , and someone who respects my choices both in and out of the bedroom...
As for sex...well, what I do and with whom is my business and that of my partner, and as long as it's consensual and pleasureable for those concerned...Hey! It's all good, I don't need soemone else to TELL me what my morals SHOULD be, thank you, I think that I've earned the right to behave as I deem appropriate at MY "advanced age"!!!
+1
Like I always say...is it working for you...or him?
That's neither here, nor there.
But the answer to your question is, yes.
For many men, FWB is the ideal........ because if men can get sex without strings, they will try for that rather than work on a deeper relationship. Id be interested to hear what (other) men thought about this statement....... Hmm....?
Sure.
It's stupid.
It's rhetoric and hyperbole.
Bvllsh1t only baffles small brains.
It's circular reasoning.
It's inane.
What that "saying" is claiming and trying to establish, is that once a man gets sex regularly, he doesn't "work" to get it again. You have to withold what he wants, in order to keep him working for it. An attempt to establishing an incentive, and a currency at the same time.
Using sex as a tool to get a relationship.
It's the Grandma's "recipe" to "get" a relationship out of a man (who apparently is ambivalent).
Only give him enough sex to keep him coming back for more, but not enough so that he doesn't work (maintain a commitment) on a deeper relationship.
A blatant manipulation.
| |
|
| Sex versus love
Posted: 11/4/2009 8:27:24 AM | I was going to remain on the sidelines....until someone started BASHING TENNIS. This I cannot abide......(-:
Onlythis is correct in at least one respect. Dear women; beware of the guy that comes at you with flowery declarations of love and fidelity, rather than the pragmatic man that shoots straight with no pretenses. History is replete with examples of the fickle romantic, who having shouted their heartfelt feelings from the mountaintops....subsequently fall out of "love" just as fluidly. | |
|
| Sex versus love
Posted: 11/4/2009 8:57:36 AM |
Sex is sex, and love is love.
Sex is better when you do it with someone you love, but it can still be great even in the absence of love
Absofreakinlutely.
Before all the "purity raped" posters get their knickers twisted, I'm not advocating sex with strangers or people you dislike. I'm definitely advocating sexually responsible behavior. I'm hugely in favor of the concept that sex is part of a loving relationship,but I can attest that FwB or a simple dating for pleasure of each others company(and sex) will not cause the world to stop turning. Becoming sexually intimate with a guy who is kind of "misleading by omission" doesn't make it quit turning, either.
You can take your sexual experiences and LEARN from them(an enjoyable learning process, hopefully) and develop a philosophy that works for YOU. Or you can become bitter and fearful of "being used for sex". Or you can decide that your hoohoo is the golden prize that men have to be "trained" to win. I'm not suggesting that anybody go the other way and completely devalue their sexuality. But it certainly is OK to have sex (responsibly, PLEASE!) with someone you are not necessarily planning to become 24/7 hipjoined LTR.
Yes, you can have sex outside of a committed "love" relationship without devaluing yourself. Sure, sex within a loving relationship would be ideal and I'm not suggesting that anyone should abandon that goal,but, handled responsibly,ethically and kept in proper perspective, sex for enjoyment isn't "bad".
Cindy O | |
|
| Sex versus love
Posted: 11/4/2009 9:45:29 AM |
I can't have sex with someone I don't love.
Me too. That's why I always say "I love you" before making love to a hooker. | |
|
| Sex versus love
Posted: 11/4/2009 10:37:22 AM | | Sex versus love? Meaning sex, or love? Why can't you have both? Many men tend to 'compartmentalize' their feelings. They can have sex without love, they can love one woman as a lifemate, and other women as meaningless good times, and so forth. That is partly the way their genes made them, and largely the way their male role models-father, brothers, classmates, workmates, celebrity idols, etc-convinced them to be. Guys who worry abour being "a real man" never will be a real man. A real man makes his own decisions, even about sex. If he wants to be a player, he doesn't let Feministas browbeat him into being anything else. If he wants to be a loving 'one woman man', he doesn't let macho morons shame him into becoming a player. Whether a person-male, or female-uses sex mainly as a form of indiscriminate recreation with anyone/everyone, or as a heartfelt expression of the love they feel for one other person, is an idividual decision each person must make for him/her self. Each decision is valid for the person who makes it, and reduces, or enhances, that person's other choices, and lifestyle, accordingly. To each his/her own. | |
|
| Sex versus love
Posted: 11/4/2009 10:56:36 AM | 1kindman4u,
c/o TongueNCheek productions...lol...
We women can be our own worst enemy when it comes to sex and love....or they can know thyselves and work with it.
Are women all GENETICALLY bi-polar with their sexuality like this?
What I like about Hollywood is that it takes some of the most puzzling aspects of life and turns them into a visual. Hence Bedazzled.
It is a known fact that most women do like the man that makes them wet and that he also has that romantic side. What is interesting is that the hero stands on his head to win the object of his desire....the woman who doesn't give him the time of day.
My man was a classic BadBoy from the start and even though I felt that sexual attraction to him, I shook my head and told him to get lost. He was the last thing that I wanted in my life at that time.
But, he didn't. He had the confidence and cojones to wear me down AND I DON'T WEAR DOWN THAT EASY!
As far as the idea of training him...hahahaha....this guy only trains himself. There is no changing him into something I want him to be. He is his own man.
The thing with men like my S/O is that he has all the attributes of a "successful" man. He has the confidence and balls to go after what he wants. No sissy stuff there.
Because of that, he has also been successful with women, too. Women like strength and a man who's not afraid of challenges. He actually has a good value system in place which is attractive, too.
As for women who are "in charge" of their own sexuality and feel if they want to fvck strangers whenever, go ahead. I guess animals do it like that. Apparently their brains are small enough that they don't get caught up with emotions, thoughts and feelings.
If you like base sex like that, do it. There is also a domino effect for everything that you choose to do in life....just know that, too. I am not the morals police and never have been. I have my choices...allow me that...and you have your choices. You are allowed to do that.
What you take from it, or get from it is up to the person and their belief system. | |
|
| Sex versus love
Posted: 11/4/2009 11:35:27 AM |
It is a known fact that most women do like the man that makes them wet and that he also has that romantic side. What is interesting is that the hero stands on his head to win the object of his desire....the woman who doesn't give him the time of day.
And this has been absolutely SO NOT my experience with real men in real life. I'm not talking about 'fvcking strangers' or any such BS, or chasing after men, WHATEVER. But I don't do "don't give him the time of day" as a strategy for creating a dating/relationship scenario. I have always chosen, and will continue to choose, dating/involvement/relationships based on mutual interest, attraction and the presumption that the man was a reasonable adult human being...not a little boy hounding until he gets what he wants, or a 'hero standing on his head' to get my attention...whatever!
I will always choose men who are real and down to earth, NOT fantasy men created by women who've read one too many bodice-ripper novels.
Yes I am very much in charge of my own sexuality...who the hell else would I let be "in charge of " something so important. But I don't have sex with strangers, not do I date men who think they can make sexually explicit remarks inappropriately.
"Base sex"...good grief, Queen Victoria...wake up and smell the coffee, it's almost 2010. There are no longer only 2 kinds of sex, 'socially approved, appropriate ,earned by years of 'dating" , and 'base sex' .
Sounds like that fear of sex thing, to me.
Cindy O | |
|
| |
| Sex versus love
Posted: 11/4/2009 11:53:09 AM | Some people need to have an emotional connection and some don't. But what if that emotional connection is only one-way?
And verity - Daisy Petals -oops I mean Belly Lass - has been "engaged" to at LEAST three men since I joined PoF just over a year ago. Well, she said she had. I don't know - she must fall in love real fast. It is confusing, since she always says she makes them wait for sex...so I figure she only has sex with them once and then they drop her... | |
|
| Sex versus love
Posted: 11/4/2009 11:57:21 AM |
I can spot a clown a thousand miles away, no matter what make up/disguise they're hiding behind...
Even over an internet connection. | |
|
| Sex versus love
Posted: 11/4/2009 12:02:37 PM | | ^^^^^^Oh come on admit it Verity she gives you something to argue about | |
|
| Sex versus love
Posted: 11/4/2009 12:04:13 PM |
If they stopped equating love to sex and sex to love I doubt men would feel the need to decieve them...
She shoots, she scores!
Absofreakinlutely!
Why is that so hard to grasp? Just because a woman GETS this concept does not mean she's out having base sex with strangers, or has given up on love, or has become jaded and bitter. All she's done is learned, and accepted, that this is how stuff works with Adventures in Modern Dating. Doesn't mean she has to personally participate, but if she does have a sexually intimate experience with a guy, and then he starts backpedalling, or just plain disappears, she's not shocked, devastated, flabbergasted,etc. Or if she becomes sexually intimate ,but it's becoming increasingl apparent that she and her partner are not a good match, she doesn't keep trying to MAKE IT BE a "real relationship", just because there has been sexual intimacy.
Yes, unfortunately, because women DO tend to seek an involvement that is about BOTH sex and love, all too many guys feel like they have to play along, or at least let her THINK he's of the same mind. So he can "get some!" Were honesty to become the norm, then honest normal women might not feel like they have to make the guy "jump thru hoops", AND, men would not have to ASSume that women who are more giving of their sexuality are 'sluts'..."not relationship material." Yeah yeah I get that you don't wanna stick your precious weiner in a hole where everybody and his kid brother have been, but if your weiner has been stuck in forty'leven holes simply to get your rocks off, pray tell, how does that make YOU any better?
Mr whatever your name is, TEAR DOWN THIS DOUBLE STANDARD.
Cindy O | |
|
| |
| Sex versus love
Posted: 11/4/2009 12:16:48 PM |
If they stopped equating love to sex and sex to love I doubt men would feel the need to decieve them...
Whilst i understand what you're saying,... why is it the women who feel the need to feel an emotional bond to have sex who suddenly have to change millenia of evolution to accomodate the guys?
i could just as easilly say,..'If men would just learn to have an emotional bond from having sex, maybe women would'nt have to nag them about commitment'
see? Works both ways.
You asking people to change something that is fundamental to themselves.
Thats like asking an introvert to become extrovert, just to make it easier for all extroverts to 'get' them
Do you really think its that simple for any person, man or woman to rip out of themselves a totally integral part of who they are to appease others who may not have their inner wiring?
Lets say im one of those people who do feel attached emotionally because of sleeping with someone.. how exactly do you propose that i suddenly learn not to give a sh*t if i never see him again the day after he's slept with me?
Conversely, how would you get a man who has sexwithout emotional connection to suddenly start giving a damn?
Hmm?
G. x | |
|
| Sex versus love
Posted: 11/4/2009 12:17:00 PM | ^^sweetness, you're right! DP was a year older than me when I first joined - and now she's seven years younger!
It must be all that non-sex and ever-flowing engagement rings. Who woulda thought...
how exactly do you propose that i suddenly learn not to give a sh*t if i never see him again the day after he's slept with me?
Conversely, how would you get a man who has sexwithout emotional connection to suddenly start giving a damn?
Hopefully, GW, you're both on the same page when you start having sex.
| |
|
| Sex versus love
Posted: 11/4/2009 12:22:03 PM | | Men do have emotions. But you can't separate sex from love, call sex bad, and then be able to correctly interpret a man's erotic expression as either love, which has become sexless, or sex, which has become loveless. Erotic love is what got lost somewhere. Romance is alive and well but to have any you can't separate love from sex, sorry, doesn't work that way. It's not either-or, it's both. You get only one or the other from slicing them apart in your view. Dealing with how people actually feel, affection is sexual and that's romance. | |
|
| Sex versus love
Posted: 11/4/2009 12:34:21 PM | Whilst i understand what you're saying,... why is it the women who feel the need to feel an emotional bond to have sex who suddenly have to change millenia of evolution to accomodate the guys?
Because they're already doing it....Women have fallen victim to society's demands more than what men have. The emotional bond that you speak of is nothing more than an illusional safety shield that reduces the sense of guilt that society has ingrained in women.
i could just as easilly say,..'If men would just learn to have an emotional bond from having sex, maybe women would'nt have to nag them about commitment'
see? Works both ways.
It could work both ways you're correct...however how many men post threads about being used sexually?
You asking people to change something that is fundamental to themselves.
Thats like asking an introvert to become extrovert, just to make it easier for all extroverts to 'get' them
Do you really think its that simple for any person, man or woman to rip out of themselves a totally integral part of who they are to appease others who may not have their inner wiring?
Nothing wrong with change..change in the right direction brings growth...If what i'm doing today is not working for ME than wisdom tells me that I may need to make a few changes...
Lets say im one of those people who do feel attached emotionally because of sleeping with someone.. how exactly do you propose that i suddenly learn not to give a sh*t if i never see him again the day after he's slept with me?
Whatever answer I give you will NOT change how you start viewing sex...My only advice would be is to let go of the fear...you may not think you have fear, in fact you'll package it nicely to make it look like good morals...I'm not condoning bed hopping with strangers, but changing your mindset by NOT equating sex to love will help reduce the emotional attachement that you have after sleeping with someone...and if all else fails just don't sleep around....
Conversely, how would you get a man who has sexwithout emotional connection to suddenly start giving a damn?
What if having sex IS the ONLY way that men achieved emotional connection?
Hmm?
G. x | |
|
| Sex versus love
Posted: 11/4/2009 12:52:03 PM |
What if having sex IS the ONLY way that men achieved emotional connection?
And.. what if sex is the only way I acheive an emotional attachment?
Now who has priority?
lol, we could go round in circles here, AA, :).. but I still think youre bending over backwards to accomodate men.
I dont believe that women are 'conditioned' to feel emotionally attached through sex, .. thats something you either feel, or you dont.. in fact bonding through sex is an evoluntionary tool for survival of species as im sure you know.
It seems youre asking women to overcome their evolution, but letting men off the hook with their hard wiring. Not very fair, methinks.
As for morality,.. i'm practical, rather than severely moralistic.
if i know myself enough to know that i become attached in that way... then it doesnt make much sense for me to put myself in the position where i will feel emotionally hurt.
Growth and change are all very well, but not at the expense of your own emotional wellbeing, iIwould have thought that self destructive.
Who exactly would benefit from me turning myself inside out in this way? me?
hardly.. as I would be enabling the very sort of driftwood, casual connections that I do not want.
It doesnt make sense to me to me.
Meh, maybe scratching a sexual itch of the moment just isnt that important to me.
It must'nt be,.. or I would be seeking it out, I suppose.
G. x | |
|
| Sex versus love
Posted: 11/4/2009 1:00:27 PM |
but I still think youre bending over backwards to accomodate men. Anatomy Alert: Bend over forward for best result.
 | |
|
| Sex versus love
Posted: 11/4/2009 1:10:43 PM |
lol, we could go round in circles here, AA, :).. but I still think youre bending over backwards to accomodate men.
I dont believe that women are 'conditioned' to feel emotionally attached through sex, .. thats something you either feel, or you dont.. in fact bonding through sex is an evoluntionary tool for survival of species as im sure you know.
If we look back at the condemnation against women throughout history, we may just come to realize that women and men are evolutionally wired in the exact same way when it comes to sex…the changes started to become apparent when women were made to suppress their sexuality. Decades of suppression caused women to lose touch of their true sexuality, their desires their passion their strength….which created a sense of guilt…this guilt than became the root of requiring the ‘emotional attachment’ before or even after having sex ….”if we’re in love than we’re not whores” or “I won’t sleep with him until I feel the ‘emotional connection’ (security)….
Emotional connection in my opinion is created by our OWN minds, it can be switched on or off at our call.....I know it's true, because the love we have with our SO is conditional.. | |
|
| Sex versus love
Posted: 11/4/2009 1:14:26 PM | Nobody's suggesting that ANYBODY bend over backwards, rewire their brains, or put themselves in positions where they are going to get hurt.
All that's being said, is to UNDERSTAND these differences exist,do not expect the opposite gender or even all members of your OWN gender to think and feel exactly like you do about sex and under what auspices and circumstances sex occurs. That way, you might not be so devastated if you have a situation where sex happens, THEN you find out that particular sex partner doesn't share your sexual philosophy.
No one is suggesting that we all become cold, calculating, unfeeling, resigned to unsatisfying 'sex only' liasons, or that we have 'base sex' with strangers. All that's being pointed out is that you can have sex without being in love. There seems to be a variance of opinions as to whether you can "be in love" without sexual intimacy, or whether sexual intimacy is PART of the process of falling in love. I suspect it could be either, or someplace in between, depending on the people involved.
But "sex versus love" suggests an adversarial division of the 2, which certainly would be a most annoying development, and not at all how I care to live MY life.
Cindy O | |
|
| Sex versus love
Posted: 11/4/2009 1:16:12 PM | For me its lust, sex, then love  | |
|
| Sex versus love
Posted: 11/4/2009 1:26:02 PM | I don't know as I'd label it as LUST, so much, but definitely has to be a strong chemistry...which probably is not going to be so strong as to lead to first meeting/first date sex, but definitely has to be present sufficiently to progress, and in the best scenarios, the sex and love help to fuel one another. And if for some reason, the process breaks down, there is no harm, no foul in calling it quits...nobody should feel obligated to go down with a sinking relationship just because there was sex involved.
Of course, then one has to have maturity of spirit to accept that sometimes things just don't sustain, and it shouldn't be about anybody casing blame, feeling rejected, tricked or used. I can't think of many things much sadder than a woman who places all her value in her p*ssy, or a man who places all his in his wallet.
Cindy O | |
|
| Sex versus love
Posted: 11/4/2009 1:31:50 PM |
wild1-1 wrote: For me its lust, sex, then love
As a woman I appreciate the healthy libido. Various studies show that in men testosterone hormone is secreted every 30 seconds, which makes them think of sex every 30 seconds. And that women who are active physically, mentally also tend to have higher testosterone levels as well. Doesn't mean they will be more promiscuous. But it may explain why some women are more comfortable with their sexuality and able to enjoy sex with the one they have as a partner.
It made it easier for me to ask my husband for sex, and have him see me as an anywhere/place/time partner (without offending others). This is why I think being able to discuss any and all subjects with the new person in ones life, can mean a better understanding of why a woman has such a healthy sex appetite, without her being seen as being easy. After all, a smart man wants a smart woman who also loves sex with him.
~Beth~ | |
|
|
| Page 5 of 11
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 |
|
Home
login 
