Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Sex and Dating  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 Leeanne
Joined: 10/14/2005
Msg: 60
view profile
History
women as pure sexual objectsPage 2 of 7    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7)
I worked very hard to become a sexual object!
Hey carlos64030 too bad you find it awkward - I bet a lot of women have been disappointed!
I always thought whytwater was a slut!
 MsMicki
Joined: 10/2/2006
Msg: 61
view profile
History
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 6/23/2009 7:31:20 PM

, WERE I to date you, it would be BECAUSE I had a sexual
interest in you. That SHOULD be UNDERSTOOD


So your sexual interest are based solely on physical attraction??

I prefer to actually meet someone and speak with them to see if they can stimulate my brain and funny bone.....not just my eyes.


The WOMAN'S **DUTY** is to UNDERSTAND this interaction. Yes, I said
****DUTY****. She accepts OR rejects the request for a date BASED on
this DUTY. If she rejects, she discharges that duty. If she ACCEPTS,
she renews that duty.


you can stick your DUTY where the Sun don't shine!
I accept a date.....to get to know someone....
to see if we might have that "chemistry" that might lead to the bedroom.
Just because I accept a date from a man........does not mean I accept the fact we WILL have sex.


In MY "Imaginary World

I'm pretty sure by this post......and the many of your posts I have read.....
your sex life is definately "imaginary"
 spendyourtimewell
Joined: 3/11/2008
Msg: 62
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 6/23/2009 8:00:24 PM
It seems you are the common denominator in this equation.
5 mins of conversation + your personality= sexual objectification,
Basically they could care less about your personality and existence as an individual because it is not that appealing to them. So the cut their losses and see you as a mere instrument of pleasure.
As for the cheap slut, as opposed to the expensive one?
The one who holds out for several wine & dines before she unwinds?
Like many women have pointed out, lighten up. Life is short, enjoy it while you can.
 MsMicki
Joined: 10/2/2006
Msg: 65
view profile
History
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 6/24/2009 4:21:26 AM
Hey Inc

Many of us women would like to be treated like sexual objects too!
We just want it to be with that "one special man" !
 whytwater
Joined: 8/7/2008
Msg: 67
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 6/24/2009 8:10:34 AM

I always thought whytwater was a slut!


LMAO! Sooo, wanna stigmatize me?
 Leeanne
Joined: 10/14/2005
Msg: 68
view profile
History
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 6/24/2009 6:29:32 PM
^^^^ no just objectifying you!!
I just don't understand why people get surprised when conversations between two adults turns sexual?! It's nothing new! If ya don't like it you move on!
 REDDRAGON.
Joined: 10/9/2008
Msg: 69
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 6/24/2009 6:44:20 PM
Come You guys cut the OP some slack it's not easy being a sex object and being come on to sexualy 24/7 put your self in Her shoes IF YOU DARE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.


..............................
 HazelRose
Joined: 6/15/2009
Msg: 71
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 7/19/2009 3:09:46 AM
80% of people say that 80% is the best well rounded number to sway your point to the other side! LOL I use odd numbers, more believeable, or at least 79.97% agree with me.
 spitfire6844
Joined: 6/30/2007
Msg: 75
view profile
History
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 7/19/2009 8:31:28 AM

We shouldn't have 'pre-determined guidelines' about when/where.


Well said. And I don't buy anyone's contention that 80% of the members contacting that person are all approaching her the same way....unless she is saying or writing things which elicit those responses. There is no way that a person will screen people well and converse intelligently only to have 80% of his/her contacts act like complete idiots.

Take responsibility for your online experience and your dating life.
 sweetest
Joined: 10/8/2007
Msg: 76
view profile
History
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 7/19/2009 8:31:41 AM
Women will always be sexual objects to men---no amount of 'massaging' with clever word play is going to obscure that fact. Knowing that...in my experience anyway, the more savvy men will usually approach with a more indirect manner...showing me a broader spectrum of interest---at least something less than a targeted torpedo zeroing in on one thing only.
 sweetest
Joined: 10/8/2007
Msg: 79
view profile
History
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 7/19/2009 9:47:30 AM
^^^miss contemplative...I stand by my beliefs that men will always continue to see women as sexual objects. I've posted similar points to various threads since I've been involved in the forums for almost two years now---my point of view is relative to my own experiences....as I've noted above.

That said, what I believe hasn't detracted from my appreciation of men. What I had been trying to articulate, is that while I understand the nature of the attraction for men and what that is about, I simply prefer a man that more or less wants to take a more indirect route to exploring it, rather than deal with someone who chooses to be crass and in your face about it. Again, from my own experience, the men I choose to date from this site and get to know...are ones that clearly understand subtlety---there is no doubt of their intent---they simply indulge me by taking a scenic route to get there, which is appreciated.

on edit
My assertions don't preclude that men are looking for other things as well...but I am subscribing to a point of view that men are doing and using what is innate for them. Does that preclude them for being about more than this? Of course not. They are fully dimensional, nuanced creatures as women are but by being on a dating site it suggests (to me) a purpose more in line with exploring the thread topic.
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 83
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 7/19/2009 11:55:46 AM

.I stand by my beliefs that men will always continue to see women as sexual objects.

I'd qualify that statement with ``as long as women are the ones who usually control if and when sex is going to happen.'' Women can get sex as easily as having a pizza delivered or even along with the pizza if the delivery person is a male. Men generally have to put a bit more effort into it, so men tend to see women in terms of having to do things to entice a woman to have sex other than just ask for sex. If sex ever becomes as casual as asking a friend to go to a movie, I think that men will no longer place sex at the top of their list of priorities for wanting to meet women and hence will not see them as sex objects to the extent they do now. I don't think it's a real coincidence that men treat women more equally today than in prior eras and that women will have sex more readily.
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 87
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 7/19/2009 8:02:29 PM
I disagree about women can get sex as easily as having a pizza delivered.

Despite thinking you disagree, you just proved my point with your next statement:
I won't go into detail on her but that is just not true, well unless you just drop your panties in front of him, which I would never do.

Which is exactly my point: All you have to do is drop your panties.
Me? I want to get to know you as a person first.

Thank you for further reinforcing my point.
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 89
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 7/20/2009 8:37:17 AM

I know that one guy in particular that that wouldn't work on, I can guarantee if I did it to him he wouldn't do a darn thing about it except get pissed off, so there you have it, not all women can get it any time just because they are a woman!

That is also beside the point, since what mayyers with regard to social conditioning is the way most men perceive most women, not anecdotal exceptions. The exceptions are irrelevant here.
 zangie
Joined: 5/30/2007
Msg: 91
view profile
History
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 7/20/2009 9:54:32 AM

I know that one guy in particular that that wouldn't work on, I can guarantee if I did it to him he wouldn't do a darn thing about it except get pissed off, so there you have it, not all women can get it any time just because they are a woman!


I think what Abelian is saying, and I personally agree..is: no, I can not get sex from any man I want at any time..but..I can get sex anytime with certain men I know or who have pursued me, if I wanted to go there..or, I could go to the local bar and pick someone up..or..I could get online and find quite a few guys that would oblige me if I was interested...unlike for men, where it is rarely that easy...IF I wanted ..I could probably make a call or two right now...and they' d come immediately...

And..I am not even one of the "hot" ones..imagine the options they have...if they wanted to take advantage of them...

And this is due to how men view women, not how women are per se...because many aren't intereseted in sex only relationships..
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 92
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 7/20/2009 10:43:40 AM

And this is due to how men view women, not how women are per se,

I'd argue that is backwatds, i.e., that men view women that way, because sex the availability (or lack thereof) of sex makes sex a higher priority for men than it does for women. That would be rather ironic, as that would imply that men would not make sex such a priority if the opportunity for casual sex were equal for men and women and at the same time, women would cease to be seen as sex objects. Even more ironic would be if women value relationships because that is more difficult to get than sex because for men the opposite is true. I'm guessing that unless attitudes about sex become equal between genders, women will continue to be seen as sex objects, since the objectification is essentially due to different priorites of what men and women want from each other first.
 zangie
Joined: 5/30/2007
Msg: 94
view profile
History
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 7/20/2009 12:45:11 PM

I'd argue that is backwatds, i.e., that men view women that way, because sex the availability (or lack thereof) of sex makes sex a higher priority for men than it does for women. That would be rather ironic, as that would imply that men would not make sex such a priority if the opportunity for casual sex were equal for men and women and at the same time, women would cease to be seen as sex objects. Even more ironic would be if women value relationships because that is more difficult to get than sex because for men the opposite is true. I'm guessing that unless attitudes about sex become equal between genders, women will continue to be seen as sex objects, since the objectification is essentially due to different priorites of what men and women want from each other first.


That's an interesting supposition Abelian...it makes sense (which your posts often do)..but, I'm wondering...while, if it was as readily available to men as to women, men might be less aggressive about it, etc...do you really think there will come a time that men and women will be on the same page with sex and relationships? Do you not think there is some biological basis for both the way men approach it, and the the way women do? (generally)

All the societal change in the world will not erase basic biology...I know for myself, I hate the double standard, but, that is about fairness...emotionally though, I still prefer realtionships that include sex, rather than just sex itself..no matter how I intellectualize why it isn't necessary, I am equal..blah, blah..and I have to believe it is internal..and I don't know that it will change any time soon..at least not for many women..I have even noticed lately that younger girls are backing away from the casual sex thing..of course, there are other reasons it's not always a wise move...besides the double standard and the objectification..

My concern, though not a given, is that with casual sex so readily available to men too...not too many would choose a relationship...why would many of them? It appears that most think it is not worth the aggravation already...and besides my personal desire for one, and many other women's..one has to wonder how this would affect families and child bearing? And how that affects society as a whole...

Some part of me can't believe that there isn't a valid and compelling reason (whether spiritual/societal or evolutionary) that men and women both see it differently..and have different priorities...
 letsgo swimmin
Joined: 12/20/2008
Msg: 95
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 7/20/2009 3:07:02 PM
I work in a male dominated industry, and fought all the comments and gestures. in the begininng of my career, So now I just go with the flow. Either that or Im accused of menstruating or "not getting any"So when they say comments or had a fight with thier wife or girlfriend. At work, thats who I represent. Maybe someday things will get better. Maybe in my future great granddaughters lifetime. As of now NO. At least we have the right to vote Right?
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 96
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 7/20/2009 3:38:09 PM

..do you really think there will come a time that men and women will be on the same page with sex and relationships?

My guess is probably not. I think something much less idealistic is more likely, but that's a different thread.

Do you not think there is some biological basis for both the way men approach it, and the the way women do? (generally)

I'm not all that inclined to attribute behaviour in society today to the behaviour that was optimal 50,000 years ago. Our ability to think and change our environment is also biological. Natural selection favors the best survival strategy given the environment in which we live, so either being able to think is an evolutionary dead end or the usual arguments about biology are too simplistic. Walking down the street and abducting the woman I want is not a good survival strategy, yet that would be what a simplistic notion of biology would say is ``natural.'' I don't think there are too many people struggling with the concept that doing that is wrong, so that sort of social adaptation obviously became what is considered normal.


All the societal change in the world will not erase basic biology

The biological arguements tend to anthropomorphize the behavior of simpler animals to explain human se behaviour. But the ability to think and develop attitudes about what is acceptable behaviour is also biology. If you think about it, having arguments about the number of partners someone has had would be ludicrous if applied to other animals. Other animals aren't embarrassed about sex. They just do it and the males usually don't take no for an answer if at all possible. We accept ``no'' as normal.

I know for myself, I hate the double standard, but, that is about fairness...emotionally though, I still prefer realtionships that include sex, rather than just sex itself..no matter how I intellectualize why it isn't necessary, I am equal.

However, what you consider a relationship that makes sex satisfying is probably a lot different than what people would have said 50 years ago, even though nothing about sex has changed other than the relationships that are considered socially acceptable. I can't speak for you, but regardless of what women will admit in public, there are few women who are really opposed to having sex within a couple of dates. 60 years ago a woman who admitted to a few one-night stands would be shunned as a slut if she talked openly about it. Today, at most, women will call it a mistake and say lump it. I think the drive for a relationship, at least in the sense women generally think of it, is due more to what is considered socially acceptable. If it weren't the relationships women found acceptable would not change with social norms.


My concern, though not a given, is that with casual sex so readily available to men too...not too many would choose a relationship...why would many of them?

I think few of them would choose a relationship when they are young. I also think they would be more likely to choose a relationship when they got older. I'd rather stay single only because a relationship means giving up a lot of things (other than sex) due to the expectations society places on relationships (which are NOT the same for men and women). Complete equality might make a relationship more desirable. It might also make total monogamy unlikely, but that predicting those details is outside the scope of hy original comments.


one has to wonder how this would affect families and child bearing? And how that affects society as a whole...

Personally, I'd think complete equality would lead to greater expectations and peer pressure for men to be responsible. But I don't really need to go there, given the current situation in which women have sex anyway, but end up having kids at a young age with men who are just seeking sex. Apparently, birth control is socially unacceptable enough to not instill that idea early enough to prevent teenage pregnancies. That is due to the idea that having sex for pleasure is wrong and therefore young people shouldn't hear about ways to do it.

Some part of me can't believe that there isn't a valid and compelling reason (whether spiritual/societal or evolutionary) that men and women both see it differently..and have different priorities...

That may be the case, but as it stands the reality is that women have sex almost as readily as men if a woman accepts a date with a man. So, really it seems like a facade. I've been contacted by women with the traditional ``friends first'' in their profiles and when I say I don't do friends first, they have always said they really didn't expect that either. It was more to cut down on the contact messages that just ask for sex. That doesn't mean I've met lots of women for just sex. I haven't. But differences in how long it would take to get there were not among the reasons we ended up not meeting. I personally think women get the losing end at present, since women are the most likely to not get what they purport to want.
 zangie
Joined: 5/30/2007
Msg: 97
view profile
History
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 7/21/2009 8:41:31 PM

That may be the case, but as it stands the reality is that women have sex almost as readily as men if a woman accepts a date with a man. So, really it seems like a facade. I've been contacted by women with the traditional ``friends first'' in their profiles and when I say I don't do friends first, they have always said they really didn't expect that either. It was more to cut down on the contact messages that just ask for sex. That doesn't mean I've met lots of women for just sex. I haven't. But differences in how long it would take to get there were not among the reasons we ended up not meeting. I personally think women get the losing end at present, since women are the most likely to not get what they purport to want.


I wonder though...how many women have sex readily for reasons other than it's a fun activity? There is some pressure these days to do it early because some men lead them to believe no one will have them if they don"t? Then there is the cajoling and attempts to belittle you, or call into question your sexuality? If I thought all women could approach sex just like men do, and weren't influenced by how they will be judged, or, if it will influence a man to keep seeing them...

I think for the most part, at least for now, most women just desire , beyond a relationship, to be wanted/liked for more than their sexual function...and while I never say never, I don't see that totally changing anytime soon...while some women seem to be able to do the emotional disconnect thing too, and good for them, most still can't...

The whole when to have sex thing is pretty convoluted for women these days..there are still men on both sides of the issue, and some in between...when I have sex has far less to do with what society or individuals think is "right" or "proper", and more to do with my emotional make up...and I am not fan of the friends first thing either, never was, and now knowing how most men feel about it ( at least the kind of men I like and want), it makes even more sense..but, almost everything to do with I want/need sex as part of a whole package...not just for recreational activity....and while there are exceptions, rarely will sex on a first date be more than that...though I have experienced it...it is rare that I can feel reasonably "safe" or comfortable getting that intimate real early with someone I really don't know..and one bad experience can make you a bit more "rational" and cautious..and to doubt your own judgment...

There is also the mixed message of : "women wouldn't get played if they held off on the sex till they get a sense of a man:...and.." only frigid, controlling manipulators refuse sex on a first date..."things are in such a flux...

Most women just want to be valued for more than sex...and when they have sex wouldn't matter if it was easier to read men, or if they could tell genuine interest in them early on...or, if they weren't so many men who aren't honest about their intentions, it used to be far easier to tell...sexual freedom is a cool concept..but, I don't really think it is truly here...and wonder if it ever will be...

And your last sentence speaks volumes, and I agree..the present climate just doesn't lend itself to that...I keep hoping that somehow we come to some kind of understanding and mutual response to each other's needs..it appears these days that more traditionally male needs are the driving force..and for myself..a relationship that encompasses both parties needs would be ideal...
 abelian
Joined: 1/12/2008
Msg: 98
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 7/22/2009 12:22:54 AM

I wonder though...how many women have sex readily for reasons other than it's a fun activity? There is some pressure these days to do it early because some men lead them to believe no one will have them if they don"t?

I'm sure that there is pressure, but it's self-imposed. If a woman is not going to regard it as a fun activity, she shouldn't do it, since there is no point in choosing to do something while being determined to not have fun doing it.


There is also the mixed message of : "women wouldn't get played if they held off on the sex till they get a sense of a man:...and.." only frigid, controlling manipulators refuse sex on a first date..."things are in such a flux...

I'd argue that women can ONLY get played by holding off, since they are basing their willingness to have sex on what they belive about a mans intentions with respect to something other than sex. In that case, they are playing a game they can lose if a guy convinces them of something that isn't true. If every decision to have sex was about nothing more than sex a woman is completely in control of getting what she wants whether she says yes or no.


Most women just want to be valued for more than sex...and when they have sex wouldn't matter

I guess my entire argument is that in order for women to get that, in general, sex has to be available to the extent that the majority of men no longer see sex as something they want and women provide. If men see women first as providing something they want and everything else second, they'll view women as sex objects. For men to stop objectifying women, they would have to shift their focus away from sex on onto those other things. That would only happen if men lost interest in sex or sex become so readily available that it wasn't the primary reason men choose to interact with women. The former is unlikely. The latter would require a shift in women's attitudes about sex to be the same as men's attitudes toward sex. That's more likely, given the degree to which women's attitudes have already shifted in the last 50 years.
 JstAnthrLonelyGirl
Joined: 7/19/2008
Msg: 99
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 7/22/2009 12:33:41 AM
I have been trying to figure this out for years. No answers, I guess we just weed through the bad ones and wait for the ones who have some G** D**N Respect for women.
 liebemusik
Joined: 8/26/2008
Msg: 100
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 10/2/2009 7:09:29 AM
Damn you generalize! I rarely receive emails from men seeking sex, some women seek out males for sexual relations only too. Btw men are sluts, whores etc too, so if you're only not having sex, due to the fear of getting a bad name then you should ask yourself this (Why is it okay for a man to spread his DNA around like wildfire, but wrong for a woman?) Stop trying to earn respect from men, make them earn your respect, both genders should remain classy until they meet the right person imo. But people can do w e the hell they want, but it's beyond stupid to allow men to control your sexuality. peace
 want to travel
Joined: 7/29/2006
Msg: 103
view profile
History
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 10/2/2009 9:35:19 AM
i cant believe you are so prudish , you belong in afganistan with the taliban, sexual women are just that...sexual, you sound bitter and angry
 Chitownguy40
Joined: 9/29/2009
Msg: 104
women as pure sexual objects
Posted: 10/2/2009 11:49:46 AM
Wow. If 80% of the men you've dated expected sex on the first date, I'd say you've been very unlucky. To want it is one thing, but to actually expect it is pretty unreasonable, unless both of you understand that is the purpose of your meeting. Hope your luck improves (and I think it sooner or later).
Show ALL Forums  > Sex and Dating  >