View Full Version : Does it honestly matter..
xdamage
11-17-2009, 10:19 AM
You do kind of have a point. I've had to do a lot of lying about my experiences to my current partner. However, I am always eager to hear about his so I can throw it back in his face when the time is right. He specifically told me he doesn't want to hear about what I've done though, so he is asking to be lied to, just like most men.
Guys will do that. They often will do whatever it takes to get with the hot girl now, and later be honest about how they really feel. But then statistically it seems guys are far less likely to really be looking for long term relationships so much as more partners for smaller periods of time. As the newness wears off they are more likely to be honest about the rest of it all.
I actually think women are also on the fence about the double standard and are 1/2 the reason it is propagated.
In a sense EtP said it. We guys really don't care that a girl is promiscuous just like we don't care that other guys are. You might even get kudos for it, but we just don't encourage our promiscuous guy friends to settle down with one person either, nor do we settle down with them. They are friends. We might hang with them, but we don't want to support them, or protect them, or have one-on-one relationships with them, nor do we encourage them to settle down.
While women seem able to over look a promiscuous history for the long term relationship, we guys are pretty clear minded I think (overall anyway) that if a guy needs to be with a lot of different women that is fine, but he probably should stay single. Of course if a guy can get a stable life with one non-promiscuous partner and have his cake too, he'll do that (people have a way of having cake and eating it they can get away with it)
Now some guys do want to settle down of course, but statistically it seems women are more likely to be thinking long term relationship. That is fine, just from the guys PoV if it is going to be more than friends with benefits there needs to some thing that makes it worth giving up all others. Like sexual exclusivity. We guys just don't become that emotionally involved with each other, let alone financially life-time involved without some special reasons. And if all women would have sex as promiscuously as we would that would entirely negate it as being a "special" reason. A lot of guys would be more than happy with that deal though; sex with a lot of promiscuous women would suit them just fine. Just don't then expect them to be thinking about settling down with one.
And all that aside, there are some good solid reasons why promiscuity in a partner is risky. If they really can't control their urges it increases the risk they bring home a disease, or father/mother a child outside of the relationship, which really screw things up in terms of how the couples resources (time, money, and emotions) are then split.
Just saying. Women also have reasons for wanting men to feel that non-promiscuous behavior is "special" and worth settling down with one partner for. I believe it, but then I've also been raised with that message from day one. I'd be okay with the message that sexual exclusivity doesn't matter, but then why exactly would I settle down with just one woman when both of us are going to have sex with many others, maybe kids and diseases with others, why would I let myself become deeply involved with one vs splitting my resources and emotions with the others?
Hey, if you can get it, great, a solid commitment with one person, and agreements to have casual/safe-sex on the side with others, awesome, but as far as I can see most people can't. Once others are involved it changes their emotional state as well. The value of the exclusivity gone, the emotions built on the premise that was part of the deal gone as well. They either have to choose non-involved promiscuity, or one partner (some sneaking in cheating on the side to satisfy their desires for multiple partners separating that part of their life from the open life).
KiwiStrawberry Splenda
11-17-2009, 12:36 PM
Guys will do that. They often will do whatever it takes to get with the hot girl now, and later be honest about how they really feel. But then statistically it seems guys are far less likely to really be looking for long term relationships so much as more partners for smaller periods of time. As the newness wears off they are more likely to be honest about the rest of it all.
.
We've been together for a while and will likely get married, so I don't think it was his intentinon at all. He has always been honest that he doesn't want to hear about any past events that involved me having sex with another guy, or being taken advantage of by another guy, or basically behaving in any slutty manner. And he knew I was a stripper from the get-go, no delusions.
Thing is, I am VERY honest and upfront about that kind of stuff, so he heard my story from the beginning, and didn't like it then or now.
I don't know how your post is at all relevant to my situation.
xdamage
11-17-2009, 05:51 PM
We've been together for a while and will likely get married, so I don't think it was his intentinon at all. He has always been honest that he doesn't want to hear about any past events that involved me having sex with another guy, or being taken advantage of by another guy, or basically behaving in any slutty manner. And he knew I was a stripper from the get-go, no delusions.
Thing is, I am VERY honest and upfront about that kind of stuff, so he heard my story from the beginning, and didn't like it then or now.
I don't know how your post is at all relevant to my situation.
I hope so. Your posts suggest you are a very intelligent person and I hope it works out well. Just being honest... Men are deeply emotional even if they hide it for the most part.
We guys can bury feelings very deep, and then BANG they come out very strong, including stuff we didn't want to face that really bothers us. I think most guys don't care about the past, or who you've previously been with (some do but I really believe most don't) but they do care about what happens going forward.
However it works out, I do hope it works out well for you.
whitelight97402
11-17-2009, 06:27 PM
I've had to do a lot of lying about my experiences to my current partner.
If a woman felt she needed to lie about her experiences with me then I wouldn't want to be in a relationship with her, dancer or otherwise.
xdamage
11-17-2009, 06:53 PM
If a woman felt she needed to lie about her experiences with me then I wouldn't want to be in a relationship with her, dancer or otherwise.
Well she is saying he is saying lie to me... I don't want to know who you fucked or how much you enjoyed it. We guys do that. We put women up on virginal pedestals. But...
If we tore that down I don't know that women would really love it so much. Tearing it down is cool, but then don't expect us to feel much more then we feel for other guys ... equality really does suck because mostly we don't feel anything for our equals. We won't support our buddies, or pay their bills, or emotionally support them or even be there. We can be friends, enjoy some hanging out, but if you want our deep emotional affection, there needs to be a reason. Our buddies fuck hot apple pies and everyone else. The few women we love need to provide something more then our buddies do.
KiwiStrawberry Splenda
11-17-2009, 07:00 PM
If a woman felt she needed to lie about her experiences with me then I wouldn't want to be in a relationship with her, dancer or otherwise.
Trust me, if you found out what I've done, you wouldn't want to be with me either. :(
KiwiStrawberry Splenda
11-17-2009, 07:01 PM
I hope so. Your posts suggest you are a very intelligent person and I hope it works out well. Just being honest... Men are deeply emotional even if they hide it for the most part.
We guys can bury feelings very deep, and then BANG they come out very strong, including stuff we didn't want to face that really bothers us.
He is very emotional, I've dated lots of emo guys, and guys who bury the feelings deep. Why are you stating the obvious?
xdamage
11-17-2009, 07:23 PM
Trust me, if you found out what I've done, you wouldn't want to be with me either. :(
Guys do all kinds of shit. We still respect each other. I actually don't think guys are turned off by what women have done really. I think they are turned off by something more subtle. They can deal with a woman who has done a lot and takes responsibility and makes her choices.
What they can't cope with is a woman who fucks around, but who is flaky about it. See if you choose it, own it, then it could be you actually could have a relationship where you make a choice to keep it between you. It is the flaky, stuff just happens to me, I am not in control, I'm a victim mind, which you really can't trust. Those types will always find a way to fuck up and can never be in control of themselves.
dlabtot
11-17-2009, 07:33 PM
Trust me, if you found out what I've done, you wouldn't want to be with me either. :(
You shouldn't think that. Many people truly do believe in forgiveness and redemption, and whatever you may have done, some won't judge you for it.
If you think you've done wrong in the past, you should try to find a way to forgive yourself.
That said, I'm intrigued... what could be so bad? Necrophilia? Coprophilia? Ritual sexual abuse of children or puppies? Children and puppies?
xdamage
11-17-2009, 07:39 PM
He is very emotional, I've dated lots of emo guys, and guys who bury the feelings deep. Why are you stating the obvious?
The truthful answer would not be pretty since it casts neither sex in a particularly positive light. Leave it at well wishing.
whitelight97402
11-17-2009, 11:23 PM
Trust me, if you found out what I've done, you wouldn't want to be with me either.
I'd be amazed if anything you've done sexually would bother me. I am a sex-addicted freak and proud of it.
I dunno, why do you want to marry a person whom you can't be open with? who wants you to lie to him? that doesn't sound like intimacy to me.
xdamage
11-18-2009, 06:24 AM
I'd be amazed if anything you've done sexually would bother me. I am a sex-addicted freak and proud of it.
I dunno, why do you want to marry a person whom you can't be open with? who wants you to lie to him? that doesn't sound like intimacy to me.
It may all make sense (given how common the pattern is).
Someone said to me, I don't object to prostitution, but I still feel like they are dirty. When we discussed why they had a point, which is that we intuitively sense that if someone has a lot of partners, like Russian roulette, the odds of them having a disease go up. In theory with science and technology you can mitigate those risks but the basic feelings make sense when you think about that.
The other problem is there a world of difference between what people want from each other when having casual sex, and what they they want when thinking about a lifetime arrangement like marriage. For casual sex a freak is good. For marriage maybe not. It depends. I think one thing people weigh in each other is how likely is the other person to remain faithful, and they do it quite simply by intuition. On some level they know that someone who is very promiscuous is less likely to be able to be faithful. Now can I prove that? No, pure gut, simple human emotion. Ask 1000 people and see if they agree or not. Basically the way the person has acted up until now is an indicator of how they will act in the future.
And especially in societies without Birth Control, sex with others is damn risky. There is a chance of disease, and a chance of having to father/mother someone else' kid for 16-18 years. That happens and it is a major suck for those it happens too. Men though might be able to get away with it and pay no price. Women far less so, since there is no way to hide that they are pregnant, though they can often hide who the father really is.
Anyway this is one of those matters where the traits people look for in each other when considering long term relationship vs short-term fling aren't equal. For some reason that bothers people and I really don't know why. Both men and women do it. Men the Madonna/whore complex, women the Bad/Good boy complex. I guess people are just pissed they can't have their cake and eat it too.
I definitely think men are generally far more open to women having had more sexual experiences but still if you look at it all on a gray scale from 0 (virgin) to thousands ... somewhere on that scale is a number where people feel like okay, normal but they can control themselves, and an extreme where they'd be left wondering if that person could really commit to being faithful. It's simple playing the odds.
whitelight97402
11-18-2009, 05:15 PM
my 'x' was a working provider, i loved her, it was odd because she was also very loyal and an awsome dedicated GF, in the end providing ruined our relationship, she was/is a beautiful woman, but i was no longer sexually attracted to her, in fact she grossed me out, it isn't fair because i have certainly gotten around myself, on some levels our relationship began to mirror some offshoot of pimp/hoe, it was bizarre. we are still friends, she has since retired, she would have retired for me. I wish I had understood myself better, at the time, i didn't understand how the whole thing left me feeling and what it was doing to her. the irony is she is now with a super sweet nice guy, he is perfect for helping her heal, he loves her deeply although i doubt her love for him at times, yet i really do hope it works out for them.
xdamage
11-18-2009, 06:44 PM
...I wish I had understood myself better, at the time, i didn't understand how the whole thing left me feeling and what it was doing to her. ...
Seems like you have a very mature outlook now. Best of luck going forward.
Earl_the_Pearl
11-19-2009, 06:55 PM
He specifically told me he doesn't want to hear about what I've done though, so he is asking to be lied to, just like most men.
"How many arms have held you and hated to let you go
How many how many I wonder but I really don't want to know
How many lips have kissed you and set your soul aglow
How many how many I wonder but I really don't want to know
So always make me wonder always make me guess
And even if I ask you darling don't confess
Just let it remain your secret but darlin' I love you so
No wonder no wonder I wonder no I really don't want to know
No wonder no wonder I wonder no I really don't want to know"
Her honest answer would be "I have no idea"; there are probably hands on her now as she is at work.
Trust me, if you found out what I've done, you wouldn't want to be with me either. :(
"Two girls one cup"? I really don't want to know.
Laurisa
11-19-2009, 09:44 PM
You do kind of have a point. I've had to do a lot of lying about my experiences to my current partner. However, I am always eager to hear about his so I can throw it back in his face when the time is right. He specifically told me he doesn't want to hear about what I've done though, so he is asking to be lied to, just like most men.
In that context it's not so much lying, but just keeping private details about your past kept quiet if that is what he wants. If you've had a shitload of partners or a history of STDs, though, I think that is worth sharing.
KiwiStrawberry Splenda
11-19-2009, 10:02 PM
In that context it's not so much lying, but just keeping private details about your past kept quiet if that is what he wants. If you've had a shitload of partners or a history of STDs, though, I think that is worth sharing.
Why? Assuming the STD wasn't permanent, what reason would he need to know about something like that? And how many partners is a shitload? To some it may be more than 5. I'm in my thirties and have been around the block.
Look, I've been totally honest with plenty of guys in the past, and have come to find out through trial and error, that most men don't want to know that their girlfriend was a whore..for pay and for leisure.
Earl_the_Pearl
11-20-2009, 12:43 AM
In that context it's not so much lying, but just keeping private details about your past kept quiet if that is what he wants. Let us not forget the honesty factor was introduced because of a current event where a dancer said she was going "out with the girls" and in fact was doing a private party. Don't blow smoke claiming borne again virginity to one with internets.
xdamage
11-20-2009, 07:04 AM
In that context it's not so much lying, but just keeping private details about your past kept quiet if that is what he wants. If you've had a shitload of partners or a history of STDs, though, I think that is worth sharing.
Why? Assuming the STD wasn't permanent, what reason would he need to know about something like that? And how many partners is a shitload? To some it may be more than 5. I'm in my thirties and have been around the block.
Look, I've been totally honest with plenty of guys in the past, and have come to find out through trial and error, that most men don't want to know that their girlfriend was a whore..for pay and for leisure.
I don't think most guys really want to know, and if you do tell them, it will count against you if they are considering long term commitment. But before everyone freaks...
We like to blame things on society. Men are products of society too. Our society still teaches a pretty strong message, the tale, in which people control their sexual urges, find someone special, settle down to an exclusive relationship, maybe have kids, share everything they have, etc.
Some guys absolutely want nothing to do with that kind of life, but a lot accept that as a reasonable life path.
There is a double standard that if guys are going to do that they should sow their wild oats before settling down, but if a woman does that (at least too much) a guy may see her as less desirable.
But that is only half the double standard!
When the full double standard is looked at it makes more sense. The other half the double standard is that guys really aren't all that strongly inclined to settle down with one woman, that it is women who tend to be the one's wanting to pair off, push for marriage, want the legal commitment to share resources, etc. Guys would tend to be happy with just living together, having sex, and splitting up whenever it was no long convenient.
And the real tough question is, is that just some social construct or a biologically driven one? Hey, it is only us people here so whether we blame things on society or biology, we people, via our very natures, make society what it is, including the females, who actually do participate in shaping social beliefs (what a concept right?)
Because primates don't get married. The monkeys have sex, a lot of it even, but they don't pair bond for life if even for a day. And if the females end up pregnant the males are barely involved. So it could be it is the women in society who are the ones that want that social construct of marriage to flourish, because they are better off having children with males who are legally obligated to stick around, help care for any children, and provide resources. And even women who swear they want no children seem to be far more inclined to push for marriage then guys do.
When you look at it like that, women have a quandary. Because on the one hand they want the benefits of promiscuous behavior like males, while OTOH they want males to believe that non-promiscuous behavior is a selling point when considering becoming legally restricted to one female for life. Women also compete and call each other whores and sluts for being overly promiscuous. They also want males to believe that if we saw two equally beautiful, wonderful women, that the less promiscuous one would be make a better long term mate, because we could trust her, that she'd be more emotionally involved in bed, etc. So men hear this message from women as well. Choose the one who is able to control herself and doesn't sleep around.
Cake wanting and eating it too perhaps?
And yes there are men who seem to really want the one on one bonding (though I've never met one who really really wanted to get married and would have been fine with just being together as a couple). But I still meet a LOT more women including young women who talk about legal marriage as important. That too is part of the big picture, the double standard, that in total makes sense why men feel like they do about female promiscuity.
Laurisa
11-20-2009, 09:02 AM
Why? Assuming the STD wasn't permanent, what reason would he need to know about something like that? And how many partners is a shitload? To some it may be more than 5. I'm in my thirties and have been around the block.
Look, I've been totally honest with plenty of guys in the past, and have come to find out through trial and error, that most men don't want to know that their girlfriend was a whore..for pay and for leisure.
Here is a good, unoffensive example:
I've had sex with ten people, my boyfriend has had sex with three. Unfortunately for me, at first, he was against having sex with me because he felt that we did not share the same 'appreciation' for sex. (Which is a load of shit because I <3 sex }:D). I was honest with him about my past sexual encounters partly out of respect for his viewpoints and partly because I had no choice (we had a lot of the same friends) and that allowed him to make an informed decision about having sex with, and eventually dating and reproducing, with me.
Assuming that an STD isn't permanent is silly because there are plenty of STDs out there that will never go away, even with treatment. (HIV, HPV, and herpes to name a few). It's a matter of perspective, but I think if someone asks you about sex partners and STDs their questions should be answered honestly, as long as there are no weird, personal questions about such things being asked. (How was the treatment to cure your syphilis, how BIG was his cock) etc.
Earl_the_Pearl
11-20-2009, 09:10 AM
Look, I've been totally honest with plenty of guys in the past, and have come to find out through trial and error, that most men don't want to know that their girlfriend was a whore..for pay and for leisure.
All women are that no biggie just don't say I'm going to church when one is turning a trick.
Earl_the_Pearl
11-20-2009, 09:13 AM
Here is a good, unoffensive example:
I've had sex with ten people, my boyfriend has had sex with three.
If you can count them it is not that many.
Laurisa
11-20-2009, 11:17 AM
I wasn't saying it is 'a lot', I'm simply using that as an example. I've had sex with a significant number of people and he hasn't. Ten people for an 18-year-old is a solid number IMO.
erotictonic
11-20-2009, 03:18 PM
xdamage, I agree with you often, but this time, your opinion is just bizarre.
#1 I know for a fact that in my own relationship, how many partners I've had does not matter one iota. Neither of us buy the double-standards, not even a bit. I would never be interested in any man who did.
#2 My bf has no desire to go out with anyone other than me, and has proven that for years. He has not even gone out with the guys once in the six years we have been together. He has shown nothing but total dedication to me.
#3 We both think other people are attractive, but neither of us are interested in going any further than that. I have rarely even seen him look at porn alone. I am the one who usually instigates it, and the only reason for him to is because he wants to further satisfy me and of course, get better sex from me.
#4 If we both are honestly happy with how the relationship is going, we both want to get married. No, he doesn't choose to just be a couple. He has the goal of marriage.
Do not think this guy is a "pussy" or has any psychological problems either. He is 6'5" tall, used to work as a bouncer, and he is successful in life. He is high in testosterone, and had to be medicated earlier in life for it. I have noticed that he prefers to befriend and date very strong women who have their own ideas and opinions. It may be because his mother was very opinionated and complicated, and was willing to fight for what she stood for, so that was his female role. (She once put her fist through a guy's window for kicking a cat, but that's another story. His mom is something else). His stepfather is a really good guy, too, and totally dedicated to his mother.
Neither of my ex'es cared how many guys I had done either. OMG, they really didn't lol.
You must choose to participate. It's a choice. Sure, we think other people are hot. That doesn't mean we are going to act on that. Sure, we hear that women aren't "supposed" to have many partners (which I think is ridiculous, because there is no true reason for it). That doesn't mean we have to agree with it. People are individuals, and they have choices. It's a choice with marriage as well. Some men choose it because the woman makes them happy and fulfills all their needs and desires better than anyone else can, and their partner is their very best friend.
I would never be interested in anyone who believed that how many sexual partners I've had makes a difference in our relationship. That indicates to me a personal weakness.
So it's different strokes; you can believe anything you want, but there is too much diversity to make the call for everyone. It's about choices, not biology or society, and the fact that you and my bf, for example, differ in opinion on so many of these issues proves that.
KiwiStrawberry Splenda
11-20-2009, 06:34 PM
Very well spoken ET.
Re: Laurisa, I'm sorry, and this is a personal issue of mine, but I have a lot of trouble taking sex and relationship advice from an 18 year old. Please forgive me. When I was your age, I had 1 sex partner ever, and now have over 100, plus over a decade in the sex industry. Things get REALLY skewed over 15 years. But thank you for sharing, I think I need to work on my issues with age-ism, its rather intolerant.
KiwiStrawberry Splenda
11-20-2009, 06:42 PM
Assuming that an STD isn't permanent is silly because there are plenty of STDs out there that will never go away, even with treatment. (HIV, HPV, and herpes to name a few). It's a matter of perspective, but I think if someone asks you about sex partners and STDs their questions should be answered honestly, as long as there are no weird, personal questions about such things being asked.
Yes, I was assuming the STD was not permanent. However, a permanent STD like HIV is a lot different than HSV and HPV. HIV is a fatal illness, herp is manageable but inconvenient, HPV can lead to cancer but does not commonly. Far as I know, those are the only incurable STI's out there...syph, gonnorhea, chlamydia, trichomonas, etc...are all bacterial infections just like you can get in the winter from someone coughing onto you on the bus.
Let me ask you how you would react if you asked your S.O this question and they answered: 150 partners and one STD, caught years ago from a cheating partner during a long-term relationship, cured by a 3-day round of antibiotics (same antibiotics they use for bronchitis).
Would you freak out? I would.....
(How was the treatment to cure your syphilis, how BIG was his cock) etc.
Who asks these questions? And what's wrong with asking about STD treatment? Syph is cured by taking a round of antibiotics, like strep throat. Its no big deal if caught early, hence regular testing is important. No, I've never had syphilis, I'm just well educated about diseases in general, and am not afraid of infections that are sexually transmitted more than things we get from contaminated food or breathing on each other (far more common).
erotictonic
11-20-2009, 07:57 PM
Let me ask you how you would react if you asked your S.O this question and they answered: 150 partners and one STD, caught years ago from a cheating partner during a long-term relationship, cured by a 3-day round of antibiotics (same antibiotics they use for bronchitis).
Would you freak out? I would.....
I've thought about this before......I know you didn't ask me, but.....I'm interested.
As long as I wanted to be with them and they fit my criteria in a mate, and they were willing to give it a go, I wouldn't care. I have an STD -HPV. I don't even know how I got it, or when. I also gave it to my bf, but he hasn't ever even said much about it (another indication of his dedication). Yes, my life was in turmoil up until I met him. I had some good times and some bad times.... I'm not saying it was all bad, but it was definitely chaotic. Do I feel bad about giving him hpv? Yes, but at the time, I didn't even know I had it.
KiwiStrawberry Splenda
11-20-2009, 08:16 PM
Thank you for sharing.Someone told me that if you've had sex with over 4 people, you more than likely have a strain of HPV. Hell, if someone has a wart on their finger, they can pass it to you if that finger makes contact with the genital region.
I'll be honest, I am really, really surprised I've never had an unusual pap, or caught any strain of HPV. Every checkup, I am just waiting for it, since its so common.knock on wood
I just hate the judgement that people get...assuming strippers are diseased, assuming women's vaginas become large and bucket-like from too much sex, etc. It really keeps people sick and in the closet about sexuality.
Earl_the_Pearl
11-21-2009, 04:17 PM
Ten people for an 18-year-old is a solid number IMO.
He-he-ha she said solid, giggle-giggle.
mediocrity
11-21-2009, 05:08 PM
Wow my thread has gone awry.
I've been thinking about whether or not I wanted to chime in on this issue. In my personal opinion, if a person had a history of STDs- and by history I mean, had them repeatedly- I would want to know. To me, that would signify a lack of concern for the health of themselves and the ealth of others.
Sure, a lot of STDs are curable with antibiotics. But what sucks is this: a LOT of them can remain symptomless, and once you notice it- it's bad enough to cause damage to you in ways such as fertility (if that's an issue to you), permanent scarring etc. I mean honestly:
"Syphilis is a sexually transmitted disease (STD). It is a bacterial infection that can be easily missed. The first symptom is a painless blister or sore that will disappear on its own. Syphilis can be treated with antibiotics. However, if left untreated, the disease can spread throughout your body over the course of many years and cause considerable organ damage. "
And that's just one example. Gonnorhea is also difficult to diagnose in women.
I wouldn't want to be with someone who was so nonchalant about their sexual health.
KiwiStrawberry Splenda
11-21-2009, 08:46 PM
All of the above will be caught with a pap smear or blood test. I'm not encouraging people to be careless...I like to get tested several times a year when I'm single, and twice a year now in a relationship, even though I only have one partner....ya never know...
mediocrity
11-22-2009, 03:27 AM
^^ That's fantastic! But honestly- how many people are that responsible?
erotictonic
11-22-2009, 05:57 AM
All of the above will be caught with a pap smear or blood test. I'm not encouraging people to be careless...I like to get tested several times a year when I'm single, and twice a year now in a relationship, even though I only have one partner....ya never know...
Yea, I should be getting tested anyway, but I'm not. I'm assuming neither of us need to. But if I was single, I would definitely be getting tested multiple times a year. Those days of being scared shitless to go to Planned Parenthood and find out the results are over. Condoms all the way. Even with a condom, I know you can catch HPV. You actually have to use saran wrap around that area to fully prevent it. And, there is a vaccine for women now for the types that supposedly cause cervical cancer.
"A can now protect females from the four types of HPV that cause most cervical cancers and genital warts. The vaccine is recommended for 11 and 12 year-old girls. It is also recommended for girls and women age 13 through 26 who have not yet been vaccinated or completed the vaccine series."
I have HSV-1 too, btw - I think I've had it since I was a kid. I think I remember some cold sores on my mouth as a kid, but I haven't had any since.
"In the case of oral HSV-1, many of the approximately 100 million Americans who are infected acquired the virus when they were children. By the time they're adults, only some 5% of people are bothered enough to consider oral HSV-1 a medical problem, according to Spruance."
"By the time that child reaches adulthood, they will be one of 50% of American’s living with HSV-1. By the time a person reaches the age of 50, they will be one of 80-90% of those who carry HSV-1."
80-90% carry HSV-1 by the age of 50. Odds aren't looking too good.
I'm mainly afraid of HIV.
erotictonic
11-22-2009, 01:50 PM
Guys will do that. They often will do whatever it takes to get with the hot girl now, and later be honest about how they really feel. But then statistically it seems guys are far less likely to really be looking for long term relationships so much as more partners for smaller periods of time. As the newness wears off they are more likely to be honest about the rest of it all.
I actually think women are also on the fence about the double standard and are 1/2 the reason it is propagated.
In a sense EtP said it. We guys really don't care that a girl is promiscuous just like we don't care that other guys are. You might even get kudos for it, but we just don't encourage our promiscuous guy friends to settle down with one person either, nor do we settle down with them. They are friends. We might hang with them, but we don't want to support them, or protect them, or have one-on-one relationships with them, nor do we encourage them to settle down.
While women seem able to over look a promiscuous history for the long term relationship, we guys are pretty clear minded I think (overall anyway) that if a guy needs to be with a lot of different women that is fine, but he probably should stay single. Of course if a guy can get a stable life with one non-promiscuous partner and have his cake too, he'll do that (people have a way of having cake and eating it they can get away with it)
Now some guys do want to settle down of course, but statistically it seems women are more likely to be thinking long term relationship. That is fine, just from the guys PoV if it is going to be more than friends with benefits there needs to some thing that makes it worth giving up all others. Like sexual exclusivity. We guys just don't become that emotionally involved with each other, let alone financially life-time involved without some special reasons. And if all women would have sex as promiscuously as we would that would entirely negate it as being a "special" reason. A lot of guys would be more than happy with that deal though; sex with a lot of promiscuous women would suit them just fine. Just don't then expect them to be thinking about settling down with one.
And all that aside, there are some good solid reasons why promiscuity in a partner is risky. If they really can't control their urges it increases the risk they bring home a disease, or father/mother a child outside of the relationship, which really screw things up in terms of how the couples resources (time, money, and emotions) are then split.
Just saying. Women also have reasons for wanting men to feel that non-promiscuous behavior is "special" and worth settling down with one partner for. I believe it, but then I've also been raised with that message from day one. I'd be okay with the message that sexual exclusivity doesn't matter, but then why exactly would I settle down with just one woman when both of us are going to have sex with many others, maybe kids and diseases with others, why would I let myself become deeply involved with one vs splitting my resources and emotions with the others?
Hey, if you can get it, great, a solid commitment with one person, and agreements to have casual/safe-sex on the side with others, awesome, but as far as I can see most people can't. Once others are involved it changes their emotional state as well. The value of the exclusivity gone, the emotions built on the premise that was part of the deal gone as well. They either have to choose non-involved promiscuity, or one partner (some sneaking in cheating on the side to satisfy their desires for multiple partners separating that part of their life from the open life).
You are kidding me. I can't believe you think you are describing "guys". LOL.
What you are describing is a sleazy little dirtbag with some seriously high narcissistic tendencies. Some guys are high in character, and they want to please their SO's. Some of this stuff I would say is delusional as well.
God, this is true entertainment.
"According to Hotchkiss[2], narcissists do not recognize that they have boundaries and that others are separate and are not extensions of themselves. Others either exist to meet their needs or may as well not exist at all. Those who provide narcissistic supply to the narcissist will be treated as if they are part of the narcissist and be expected to live up to those expectations. In the mind of a narcissist there is no boundary between self and other."
xdamage
11-24-2009, 07:42 AM
You are kidding me. I can't believe you think you are describing "guys". LOL.
What you are describing is a sleazy little dirtbag with some seriously high narcissistic tendencies. Some guys are high in character, and they want to please their SO's. Some of this stuff I would say is delusional as well.
God, this is true entertainment.
"According to Hotchkiss[2], narcissists do not recognize that they have boundaries and that others are separate and are not extensions of themselves. Others either exist to meet their needs or may as well not exist at all. Those who provide narcissistic supply to the narcissist will be treated as if they are part of the narcissist and be expected to live up to those expectations. In the mind of a narcissist there is no boundary between self and other."
The problem is our society re-shapes our nature through 20+ years of social training by which time most make it, and some don't and end up in jails. The main reason why people are confused about humans is they can't/don't want to see the instincts that are strongly at play behind the social training. Plus our society and social training is fragile, and any catastrophic event could have people reverting to instincts (as we see happen in any catastrophe when the majority revert to basic survival behaviors and it is often not pretty).
The other problem is if you look at large groups (10s-100s of millions) you find exceptions on the bell curves of behavior. It's all too easy to look at those and confused those with norms.
What I'm describing is that statistically guys really aren't fundamentally a lot different then primates (nor women) if you don't train them. Are there exceptions? Sure. Are exceptions the norm? No.
Most really would just fuck and run through much of their life (at least until no other females would have them). There are exceptions, but exceptions are not the rule. But likewise women are not instinctively any less self serving, though they do seem to have statistically stronger maternal instincts, otherwise they seem to be every bit as self-serving as males.
I don't look at women (or men) at being sleaze-balls for being essentially self-serving or having instincts. I do look at them at being un-trainable if society can't shape their thinking and behaviors and I avoid those who can't be re-shaped as those who can't be re-shaped are dangerous. Then again I don't hang out with wild animals either. I keep as a pet a domesticated, well trained one.
That view that we humans are not inherently good (or bad), but essentially survivalists is not the popular think of the day. Likewise that we are well domesticated and well trained (though our instincts remains strong and are at play constantly) is not the popular think of the day, but remember, people honestly believe in huge groups in religions, gods, demons, spiritis, witches, and much else to explain behavior. The idea for example that someone is suffering from say, serotonin depletion probably is/was not well accepted by a society that wants to believe humans are inherently good, but demons are infesting their mind. Every society has mass myths that future generations challenge, including you can BET ours. But those who grow up with the mass myths see them as truths.
I also grew up in our society and know the popular think well. I just question some of the popular thinking because it doesn't actually make sense now that I've read all I've read, and spent as much time as I have actually working with humans who haven't been as trainable (due to personality disorders, mental illness, brain damage, etc.).
I also don't expect the population as a whole to agree with me, but I'm not the only one who believes it either. Factoring in our animal nature is slowly gaining ground in understanding human behavior, and it is why evolutionary psychologists and socio-biologists are not well loved at the moment. They are pushing back at popular think but they have too. That is how progress is made.
KiwiStrawberry Splenda
11-24-2009, 01:58 PM
20 years? How about a few millenia? It DOES serve the male biologically to ensure that his progeny survives. Hence, family units are created. Now, these family units can differ greatly from the Western nuclear family, but it absolutely BENEFITS a male to take care of the women that will bear their children. Sometimes its even multiple women who do so.
Fuck and run? We aren't snakes, yo. Primates, especially chimps, have very sophisticated social structures that involve protection of the females and offspring of the group. Are you completely discounting this? Humans aren't leopards, we are not solitary creatures.
If anything, its more beneficial for your modern paleo-male to take in many wives, and care for all of the ones that bear his children.
xdamage
11-24-2009, 05:57 PM
20 years? How about a few millenia? It DOES serve the male biologically to ensure that his progeny survives. Hence, family units are created. Now, these family units can differ greatly from the Western nuclear family, but it absolutely BENEFITS a male to take care of the women that will bear their children. Sometimes its even multiple women who do so.
Fuck and run? We aren't snakes, yo. Primates, especially chimps, have very sophisticated social structures that involve protection of the females and offspring of the group. Are you completely discounting this? Humans aren't leopards, we are not solitary creatures.
If anything, its more beneficial for your modern paleo-male to take in many wives, and care for all of the ones that bear his children.
I'm not discounting anything since I've read plenty on how primates behave. But please don't waste time telling me "if anything it is more beneficial..." because if that was the best survival strategy given all the variables, that is what our ancestors would have done. And likewise if that is best strategy today, and what works the best, it will work if it can. If it is not working then it is because you are over looking some variables.
I'm being very clear.
It is not enough to simply blame human behavior on "society". Society is us people. There is nobody else here but us. When people engage in statistical tendencies over and over and over again in culture after culture, it says something about our natures. We don't have to like it all, but we can choose to face it head on or lie to ourselves.
That human nature is buried behind a complex murky mess of social training, fads, and exceptions, I don't care. That is reality. Not everyone can cope with that and still accept there are statistical patterns despite the less common exceptions and temporary social fads. What I do care about is that is whatever the truth is, even if the truth is any combination of:
o It is human nature (and for many animals as well) to like sex, not the work of the devil or the sign of depraved mind (women today generally like this one, but it wasn't always so).
o A few millenia (or 20 years) is not enough to significantly undo hundreds of millions of years of evolved instinct (this is one people don't want to believe because they confuse what we do with animals where we selectively refuse to let some animals breed, where we force others to breed, with human socially trained behavior where everyone continues to breed).
o Some people are apparently born to be homosexuals (homosexuals like this one).
o Some women apparently do not have an instinctive desire to have children (women usually like this one since it takes pressure of those who feel no desire to have kids).
o Statistically, men are more likely to abandon their kids if they can find a female to take care of them then other way around, and statistically more likely to have no desire to have kids or feel little paternal instinct even if they do the minimum to keep them alive (women generally don't like this one since it is not in their best interest if they do have kids).
o Statistically, men are more likely to be interested in violent recreations then women (women often don't like this one since it is a reminder men are dangerous).
But basically I don't really care though what today's young people believe. Nor do I care what my generation believes. I care what the truth is and the truth is not being pushed by the masses who simply latch on to whatever is in their own best interest and is popular. Popular does not mean true.
I do think our society has a better grasp on human nature then it did in the past but it is an on-going process and it requires tremendous ego to think that our generation is finally the one that has it all right.
erotictonic
11-24-2009, 08:43 PM
Why is this stuff so important to you xdamage? I think it's time to answer that question for yourself. Hell, when I was doing things I honestly don't find to be "right", I just surrounded myself with people who had no conscience. Then it was win-win. You are making your life a lot more difficult than it has to be. Just find yourself some dirtbags who give each other high-fives for cheating, hang out with them, and you're there. You don't have to prove to me or anyone else that underneath it all, they really are a dirtbag exactly like you think you are lmfao. (Maybe I don't even think you are as bad as you think you are).
It comes down to making choices, as I've said. Sure, I could go hang out with dirtbags and be one if I wanted to, but I don't want to. The things I choose to do make me a dirtbag or a non-dirtbag. It doesn't matter what's in my head or if I am a dirtbag underneath it all, or whether I might be a dirtbag given a different environment or time or place, or whether underneath it all, I am an animal who could be a mass-murderer or some shit. It matters what I choose to do today, in this time and place, and that's my choice. I'm in control of my instincts and my body, today.
I could be sitting here thinking about raping someone, for example, but unless I act on that, as in either raping someone or looking at disgusting images of rape or whatever, then I am not a rapist. What's underneath it all doesn't matter, it's what you choose to do about it. A person can choose to grow or choose to destruct. It's their very own choice. There are two people with bpd: one fights their way to recovery and the other doesn't. Choices. Even people with apd, who have no other choice but to BE apd, choose not to ever visit a jail.
Socio-biology just doesn't make nearly as much of a fuck as you think it does. If I believed that underneath it all, I was a serial killer, it wouldn't change a damn thing lmfao.
I honestly couldn't care less about any of the statistics or shit that you posted, as it applies to me and my life. I am still who I am, regardless of a statistic or what anyone else thinks, and most people will be, regardless of reading truth or non-truth, some people are going to believe what suits them, others are going to believe in a religion, etc. Society does shape, I agree that popular thought is a lot of times ridiculous, and I think that most religion is ridiculous, that's why I generally don't allow it to shape me and I choose to subscribe to what I want to subscribe to.
Take it all away, and put people in a totally different environment, sure they will be different. But at the end of the day, character will still be viewed on a sliding scale, when people realize it exists, according to that society's beliefs. If you want to live outside of popular belief, by all means, go for it. I have all my life, for the most part. Kinda goes with the territory when you grow up in a personality-disordered household. There's something to be said for it when you can gain control, though. Independence is much easier to gain. No, it's not hard for me to see that people act the way they do ALOT of times in order to fit in with others. It just depends on what your drives are.
KiwiStrawberry Splenda
11-24-2009, 09:10 PM
X, as usual you've completely ignored, or missed, my point. We've been going in these circles for years and you haven't changed a bit.
I have not once mentioned morality or ethics. In fact, I don't believe in them aside from the social constructs that they are. We actually agree on this, in our own way.
And homo sapiens have been social and lived in various family/tribe groups long before we were ever even homo sapiens. Truth is...fuck and run...killing your children due to lack of mother instinct....these ARE the exceptions.
In general, hominids, for millions of years, have lived together, hunted and gathered, and bred..in a social group consisting of males, females they breed with, their children, and their elderly. Humans are slow, small, and we don't have sharp teeth or claws. We weren't even apex predators until we developed the tools to effectively kill lions and bears. Being social, living together, creating family units........ITS GOOD FOR SURVIVAL AND REPRODUCTION AND IS VERY BIOLOGICALLY NATURAL!!
Killing healthy newborn babies and leaving groups of fertile women to fend for themselves on the reg isn't why we run this shit, aka, earth.
o It is human nature (and for many animals as well) to like sex, not the work of the devil or the sign of depraved mind (women today generally like this one, but it wasn't always so).
o A few millenia (or 20 years) is not enough to significantly undo hundreds of millions of years of evolved instinct (this is one people don't want to believe because they confuse what we do with animals where we selectively refuse to let some animals breed, where we force others to breed, with human socially trained behavior where everyone continues to breed).
o Some people are apparently born to be homosexuals (homosexuals like this one).
.
Are you fucking drunk again man? The above is completely convulted, unclear, and makes no sense. Also, did you just proclaim yourself a homosexual? That's cool.
erotictonic
11-24-2009, 10:28 PM
X, as usual you've completely ignored, or missed, my point. We've been going in these circles for years and you haven't changed a bit.
What's new?
Just another example of a deluded person who chooses to believe what suits him. He just has to write a book to do it instead of making it simple. :P Damn, if getting rid of the guilt took that much energy, I think I would just do the simple thing and change. :D
Also, my postings all come from someone who WAS at one time what I consider to be, a dirtbag (me). No, I am not pointing the finger at anyone, I'm merely summarizing what Xdamage described, and observing what he is doing. I'm not here to stir up trouble.
xdamage
11-25-2009, 03:29 AM
And homo sapiens have been social and lived in various family/tribe groups long before we were ever even homo sapiens. Truth is...fuck and run...killing your children due to lack of mother instinct....these ARE the exceptions.
Like most people you completely ignore what you see people do every single day for what you want to believe.
Here are your words:
"but it absolutely BENEFITS a male to take care of the women that will bear their children."
While completely ignoring that even the mothers today for all of our evolved nature, go out of their way to stop pregnancy including by their social actions, via birth control that has become a hugely profitable business, and by abortions.
And while our laws do prevent people from engaging in child neglect or killing their children, and maybe there is something that even turns on feelings after birth, we humans, including the females, are not going out of our way to have as many children as we possibly can.
Has it occurred to you neither are primates? That maybe the males have little or nor feelings at all about how many of their children survive and they are not trying for numbers anyway? Maybe the only ones that survive are the ones who due to a set of variable we haven't yet fully identified, make it, and the rest perish? That that is what works?
Are you fucking drunk again man? The above is completely convulted, unclear, and makes no sense. Also, did you just proclaim yourself a homosexual? That's cool.
It made sense. You didn't like the implications of it which are that like most people you do believe in human nature, just you want to pick and choose it when it suits you.
And no, I'm not homosexual, but most likely that was an attempt at an insult. Nice try but see even us supposedly evolved people can't stop making fun of homosexuality. Welcome to being a human.
erotictonic
11-25-2009, 04:37 AM
Like most people you completely ignore what you see people do every single day for what you want to believe.
You do it too. You WAY do it lol.
Here are your words:
"but it absolutely BENEFITS a male to take care of the women that will bear their children."
While completely ignoring that even the mothers today for all of our evolved nature, go out of their way to stop pregnancy including by their social actions, via birth control that has become a hugely profitable business, and by abortions.
And while our laws do prevent people from engaging in child neglect or killing their children, and maybe there is something that even turns on feelings after birth, we humans, including the females, are not going out of our way to have as many children as we possibly can.
Has it occurred to you neither are primates? That maybe the males have little or nor feelings at all about how many of their children survive and they are not trying for numbers anyway? Maybe the only ones that survive are the ones who due to a set of variable we haven't yet fully identified, make it, and the rest perish? That that is what works?
I don't see why women having abortions has anything to do with the fact that it benefits the male to take care of women who are going to bear their children lol. If men didn't care about their kids and wives, they wouldn't be working their buns off to hand all the money over to make sure they are cared for, and for a lot of men, pampered. Shit, someone's paying for all these college educations, cars, and Ipods. You are not factoring in a little thing called humanity that many social beings possess.
Also, so if women are choosing to have abortions, that must mean they are making a choice, right? But I thought you didn't believe anyone made choices; our behaviors are all just a result of biology and environment. We are merely pawns with no personal power or control or choices. And if we do something we don't quite feel right about, we can always write it off to biology.
It made sense. You didn't like the implications of it which are that like most people you do believe in human nature, just you want to pick and choose it when it suits you.
Why are you copying what I said to you and applying it to someone else's situation?
And no, I'm not homosexual, but most likely that was an attempt at an insult. Nice try but see even us supposedly evolved people can't stop making fun of homosexuality. Welcome to being a human.
Well, I was wondering myself, since it did say you were there. No making fun of intended. There are enough gay people around here so that it doesn't even occur to me to make fun. Again, my choice.
xdamage
11-25-2009, 05:02 AM
Why is this stuff so important to you xdamage? I think it's time to answer that question for yourself. Hell, when I was doing things I honestly don't find to be "right", I just surrounded myself with people who had no conscience. Then it was win-win.
I never just did things I didn't think were right and surrounded myself with like minded people. Don't assume your own bad behavior in your past is my bad behavior, or that your own need to make excuses earlier in your life are my motives.
Rather I've always been someone working in the field of or on the sidelines reading about, human psychology. I don't do it for your approval. I do it because it interests me.
We humans are not inherently good scientists. It's why masses of people can get behind believing in burning witches, religion, mass hate, or whatever is the emotionally charged belief of the day, and really don't care to sit down and calmly discuss or research. The emotions are far more fun.
However you said yourself you were emotionally unwell once. There are multiple reasons for mental unwellness ranging from personality disorders, chemical imbalances, brain damage we can see, brain damage we can't yet measure, genetic disorders, late onset disorders, etc.
Has it occurred to you that you are the beneficiary of the few someone(s) out there who tried to get past the emotional non-scientific treatment of people with mental or emotional issues and get to the truth of it? That someone else before you was screaming "you're just trying to make excuses for them" and they honestly believed they were doing the right thing by insisting that is the end of it.
Anyway, a lot of young women today are terrified by evolutionary psychology and to be quite honest, they sound like my parents who rebelled against the then popular beliefs of the day.
I even do understand why they fear it. Because the truth about human nature could be used as an excuse to act badly, but then again some people have used the truth about sex to act badly haven't they? Some have engaged in irresponsible sex having learned that sex is a normal evolved instinct.
Guess what? People who are going to behave badly will always find excuses. I don't fear giving them another.
And they also use false-hoods and mis-beliefs about human nature to act badly as well don't they?
Look, nothing I write is going to make you feel different. What I can say is that we're pretty lucky to grow up in a technically advanced point in history and we have a lot of free time to just think and reflect. There has been some interesting perspective changes just in the short time I've lived but the accounting for human genetics, and instincts into understanding human nature is still a relatively new PoV.
The fact that is has many people afraid, yourself included, is not surprising. That it stirs strong emotions in you, not surprising. That doesn't make it not true. Sometimes even strong stirrings in the masses is a common pattern in the wake of breaking down old emotionally strong belief systems.
Todays 20-30 somethings are probably not the epitome of human understanding they like to think themselves to be, but FWIW every generation of 20-30 somethings go through the same thing. Human understanding of ourselves is going to change whether you are personally accepting of it or not.
Your fear about making excuses is just an excuse itself not to face why you are afraid of evolutionary psychology and the implications of. But people utlimately are measured by what they do... not what they think... so who is really worse? Someone who acts badly and has an excuse? Or someone who acts well but "makes excuses" for others? Think about it.
xdamage
11-25-2009, 05:19 AM
I don't see why women having abortions has anything to do with the fact that it benefits the male to take care of women who are going to bear their children lol. If men didn't care about their kids and wives, they wouldn't be working their buns off to hand all the money over to make sure they are cared for, and for a lot of men, pampered. Shit, someone's paying for all these college educations, cars, and Ipods. You are not factoring in a little thing called humanity that many social beings possess.
If you ignore a discussion and jump in mid-stream then yes it won't make sense.
Look, I'll make it simpler. If the only thing that drove people was to have as many kids as possible then they wouldn't go out of their way to not have kids. That was in reply to why male primates don't act in ways to make sure every child survives. That they are having sex for sex, not to have as many off spring as they can. That they probably don't give a shit if a bunch die or are never conceived.
Yea, we, like primates seem to act in ways that assure a few survive, but not all and it is clearly not the only variable at play.
Also, so if women are choosing to have abortions, that must mean they are making a choice, right? But I thought you didn't believe anyone made choices; our behaviors are all just a result of biology and environment. We are merely pawns with no personal power or control or choices. And if we do something we don't quite feel right about, we can always write it off to biology.
The grand patriarchal conspiracy theory is really lame to be quite honest. Choose whatever you want. We don't care. Like really, we do not care.
I can't help you if the idea that human choice is not purely A (all will) or B (some instinct); that there is something in the middle which is a mix of instinctive drives moderated by intellect and social training. That the instincts are big factors in large groups of how people behave.
You either see that complexity or you don't. Most don't. But that doesn't mean when we look at humans in large groups that they don't follow instinctive patterns of behavior. If that raises strong emotions in you, well, that is your issue to figure out why, not mine to pretend it isn't so.
Well, I was wondering myself, since it did say you were there. No making fun of intended. There are enough gay people around here so that it doesn't even occur to me to make fun. Again, my choice.
Why would you care if I was homosexual? Unless you see it could be that despite all of our social happy-happy stuff, the fact is we do realize that homosexuality is statistically abnormal, and we humans innately do have feelings about abnormal behavior among our kind.
See that doesn't mean we can't teach our kids to not be judgmental, or to try, but by facing that, we also know where it comes from, and we also don't need to feel utter angst.
The point about homosexuality which alluded you and kiki is that for the LONGest time people believed homosexuality was a matter of pure will, or sin. That the genetic explanation is such:
1.) Most of us are wired to be heterosexual because that is what works to survive. It is not a "choice" anymore then being hungry is a choice.
2.) A few people are seemingly wired to desire the same sex. For them it is also not a "choice". Putting aside those who experiment, and the complexities of some who may be wired to be bi, this a major revelation that many people rebel strongly against. Those who want to believe it is evil, wrong, bad, etc.
3.) That factoring in the genetic aspect has resulted in people treating homosexuals better. It is not an "excuse". It is a fact. And one that is mostly harmless so doesn't even require any further action to cope with but to teach the fact.
If that example of how evolutionary psychology helps us to better understand ourselves doesn't make sense to you, well then yep, you'll never understand it so let's just call it done with please.
erotictonic
11-25-2009, 05:30 AM
I think it's bizarre that you would think I was afraid of evolutionary psychology, and have no idea where you got that notion. That's just hilarious. I think evolutionary psychology adds to the whole.
I'm pro-responsibility and pro-individual. I'm the last one to make excuses for anything, and if I choose to live a "bad" life, hell, I am choosing it. I have less guilt than most people naturally, due to my background, and I don't need excuses as much as the next guy. When I was a dirtbag, I would've said I was a dirtbag and been ok with that. That's kinda how I ended up, due to a lot of apd influences. They are fully aware of what they are and no bones about it.
Oh fucking please. I have a 134 iq. I can understand mostly anything I feel like understanding. My bf is practically a genius. That's why I can afford to sit here and argue with you instead of working right now, because he provides for the both of us, and he rocks at it.
Here, you misread me. I was not writing what I think here, but what it appears that YOU think:
Originally Posted by erotictonic View Post
Also, so if women are choosing to have abortions, that must mean they are making a choice, right? But I thought you didn't believe anyone made choices; our behaviors are all just a result of biology and environment. We are merely pawns with no personal power or control or choices. And if we do something we don't quite feel right about, we can always write it off to biology.
LOL. Where on earth did you get the idea that it raises strong emotions in me? I think that regardless, people have choices, which is something you don't factor in to your discussions. Regardless of what's behind the scenes, we make choices. yes, I think our choices are made based on many things, all those things that factor in to make us who we are, biological, mental, and psychological, societal, and environmental. Duh.
I couldn't care less whether you are homosexual or not. I just noticed that you said it in your post. And yes, I have studied homosexuality, been around homos and bis, and get what you are saying. You predetermine that you are actually educating people, and that people do totally subscribe to popular thought. You seem to predetermine that your audience is "average". I think that once you are around enough homosexuals, you become desensitized to it. It's no big deal.
None of your fucking points alluded me, don't flatter yourself, fool. I
simply see the big, glaring holes you fail to recognize, and it's funny. AND I don't agree with you sometimes. That DOESN'T mean I am afraid of what you are saying lmao. My bf and I have both pegged you a total narcissist.
Seeing as you don't HEAR anything, it's a one-sided conversation, and you just want to preach your shit to SOMEBODY, I am going to bail out of this.
xdamage
11-25-2009, 05:47 AM
I'm pro-responsibility and pro-individual. I'm the last one to make excuses for anything, and if I choose to live a "bad" life, hell, I am choosing it. I have less guilt than most people naturally, due to my background, and I don't need excuses as much as the next guy. When I was a dirtbag, I would've said I was a dirtbag and been ok with that. That's kinda how I ended up, due to a lot of apd influences. They are fully aware of what they are and no bones about it.
I don't know any "dirtbags" who own while they are behaving as such. Later in life they do AFTER they face it but by that time they are usually quite responsible people.
And actually that is the key thing. Facing your own bad behavior does not mean you can't act responsibly. In fact it is often NECESSARY to face truth to overcome bad behavior.
Likewise, facing human nature, even the tendencies to be violent, to have sex for sex not for children, to be self-serving, etc., does not mean that it ends up being an excuse for bad behavior.
I make no excuses for negative male behavior, but likewise I don't make excuses for negative female behavior, and there is plenty of that despite the still popular belief that men are made of snails and tales, females of sugar and spice.
In the context of this thread then, people want to have their cake and eat it too, which is what humans do. Most people want the benefits of monogamous relationships and social structures (or at least well controlled ones with select partners); and the benefits of work that allows a lot of non-monogamous physical contact with others.
That is the fundamental painful fact nobody wants to face head on. That those wants are in dramatic conflict and always will be, and that any resolution means giving something up. Either that people don't give a shit about monogamy in which case the benefits of the business fail, or they do, in which case there is stigma associated with the job, which is what makes it worth paying for.
People really are capable of being slaves to multiple competing wants and facing them all head on hurts.
I heard you fine, but the implications of what I am saying basically suck and rather then face the suck, you keep hoping to pigeon hole me into some standard simpleton thinking. Facing the sucky conflicts of interest straight on will make it clear where I'm coming from.
erotictonic
11-25-2009, 06:35 AM
Nah, you're assuming I want you to change your thoughts. I don't necessarily. I accept people as they are. I like observing people, and hearing what they think. I find it interesting.
I simply think you're a whackjob, but that's ok with me. :) I've known many. And of course I don't agree with a good amount of it because my experiences and knowledge tell me that that's not the case, but that is also ok with me. I'm not as interested in these topics as you are, and that's also ok with me. I find them a lot less exciting; different strokes.
Some actually very simple concepts could do you some good at this point, I think. You are missing a good amount of simple truths. And some very simple truths can negate about half the cookie-cutter shit you are talking about. You're using sociobiology and evolutionary psychology as new religions for you. They are all things to all people, in your eyes. You also in a lot of scenarios seem to believe rarities or minorities are the norm. It's rather strange. But I think that's due to 1) you want to believe that; 2) your environment has possibly taught you that it's true. I know another girl that does this, and it's because it's the only argument she can find to reason herself into staying in her current situation. People will concoct all sorts of shit sometimes that to an outsider, seems very unreasonable. I told her she was betting on rarities, but of course it did nothing.
The truth is, I like my relationship. I like having sex with my bf; it's comfortable and nice. I prefer it to having sex with strangers. Then I have to think about getting and giving diseases, being taken advantage of in some way, dealing with new people, etc. etc. It's not worth it. It's work to me. Honestly, at the end of the day, a dick is a dick, and when it's on someone I love, that makes it better. No, I don't see a conflict of interests. I see it as being what I choose to do. If I was single, I still wouldn't have sex with strangers. I don't find it enjoyable. It has nothing to do with the fact that I think it is morally wrong in any way. I just have too many concerns about it that come into play that make it a big pain in the ass. So, in my case, I didn't give a thing up in order to be with my bf, I gained sex. For a solid year before, I didn't have sex but with one person and it sucked. So, I think it just depends on the person here. I don't think everyone prefers being in a relationship and then going outside of that for extracurricular activities. I've had a whole shitload of bad sex with people I didn't really know. No thanks to it.
Much like some guys here, even though they have a buffet of women before them, continue to return to their faves. The guys prefer them and they are comfortable. They've formed a nice relationship with them. There's something to be said for that vs. awkward sex with a stranger. Birds of a feather flock together, and sometimes, the people you pick up for sex end up being birds of a different feather. LOL. That's not comfie.
As far as my bf wanting extracurricular sex, he assures me that he doesn't, and I believe him totally. If you saw how he treated me, you would probably agree. I've offered him many times to go out with friends, party, and see other girls, a lot when we first met. I gave him the option of "having his cake and eating it too", and he didn't choose it. He wanted someone special to be devoted to. It's what he wanted.
There are tons and tons of people out there who have situations where they don't choose extracurricular sex, for one reason or another. One cookie-cutter way of thought doesn't answer for everyone. Sure, I'm a person who has instincts coupled with many other factors that contribute to my choice. Maybe given a scenario where my environment was different, I would choose differently, but what difference does that make now? All I can do is mold myself into the person I want to be, knowing what I know.
It comes down to not eating, breathing, and sleeping sociobiology. For crying out loud, get a new topic lol. It's not a new religion. It's like you are obsessed with it, and it doesn't seem healthy.
There are too many examples of other to prove that it doesn't apply to everyone, which is what I am showing you. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see it. The majority of people would feel bad living the way you are describing. Most people have a conscience and some humanity about them, which is what you can't seem to understand.
KiwiStrawberry Splenda
11-25-2009, 12:29 PM
I'm sorry X, do you re-read your novel posts? Yesterday, you said you were homosexual. Its not an insult, just wondering why you claimed to be?
And again, I just can't make heads nor tails over your responses. Please, try and read them sober, and very slowly, see if you can comprehend what you've written. Or perhaps you are not adept and translating the thoughts in your mind to the written word. Which is ok, we might have a better verbal discourse instead one day.
And I don't even think we are debating here, because you aren't addressing any of my points, you're going off on semi-related tangents. Same with ET, it doesn't appear that you are even reading her words..just continuing on the same solopsistic rant.
erotictonic
11-25-2009, 03:21 PM
And I don't even think we are debating here, because you aren't addressing any of my points, you're going off on semi-related tangents. Same with ET, it doesn't appear that you are even reading her words..just continuing on the same solopsistic rant.
Yea, pretty much. He's obsessed, one-track minded, and incredibly close-minded. As are most followers.....
He's been had. :D
xdamage
11-26-2009, 12:36 PM
When I grew up not that long ago, people did (and still do) strongly object to believing in Dinosaurs. Why?
Not everyone did. The strongest objection came from hundreds of millions who grew up believing the world is about 6000 years old, mixed in with a multitude of other beliefs. Were these people wide open to scientific proof to the contrary? To put it bluntly no. They had already believed that “faith” trumps proof, and yet ironically as a group we suddenly found them wanting absolute proof of Dinosaurs, and pointed out that Scientists liked to make up Dinosaur stories, some of which were wrong. And they were right, many stories were wrong, but it was ironic for a group that never previously demanded proof of their beliefs, but maybe that is human nature at play? Let me continue...
So if you were of another religion that had no such presumption then of course the idea that Dinosaurs existed several million years ago is non-threatening. Which doesn't mean nobody objected to Dinosaur research. Many people also don't believe we went to the moon because of various reasons including it points out how not-smart they are as compared with others, but a lot of us do believe in Dinosaurs and we believe we've sent men to the moon because the evidence is too hard to ignore.
Here is the thing the nay-sayers don't get. We don't throw out the baby with the bath water. We get that some of the theories are just made up what-if stories, some of them are actually kind of interesting new thoughts, but we know that the specifics of exact dates, the color of the skin of the dinos, what they ate, how they lived, is and will remain mostly guesses. Nevertheless we do believe in Dinosaurs, and for most of it is that simple.
But for those who believe in a 6000 year old earth they are in trouble. It means if that is not true then maybe much else predicated on that false belief is not true, and many of them have a life-time of beliefs and emotions invested that they have to call into question. I've been there so I know that can take a long time and many never can, but regardless, the rest of society believes in Dinosaurs and has proven it about as well as it can be proved.
Now when I grew up, most men and women believed men were men, women were women. It was simple. A or B. Black or White. The idea that there was something in the middle, men who were or wanted to be feminine, women who were or wanted to be more male like in behavior in thinking was heresy for many and invoked strong emotional reaction.. Many of us including myself could see it just wasn't that simple. That the theory of social training made some sense, that there was some evidence, and backed it.
It's not that we believed every single experiment and theory without question. It is that we generally saw there was a Dinosaur in there, truth to the social training belief, even if the specifics remained debatable.
Now wind ahead. Many of today's youth have latched on to the social training belief theories. Not because they really have demanded anymore proof then those who believed in a 6000 year old earth, but because it is what they grew up with. And it is a nice simple theory, A or B, easy to understand. They have a lot of emotions and beliefs tied up in the theory.
Along comes the new Dinosaur theory, that social training isn't the end of it, and genetics are factors in “human nature” and “sexual roles”.
And history repeats itself like it probably always will. WE who are open to it get that a lot of theories are being spun about how exactly we evolved, just like we get there are a lot of theories about Dinosaur history, but we welcome the new thinking, the new ideas, and we can't deny that the evidence is there is Dinosaur in there somewhere. A truth about human nature that there is just too much evidence to deny.
At the same time, those who have the most emotionally invested in social training theory are suddenly asking for proof, and pointing out the sociobiologists are spinning stories and theories, while never really having questioned how many stories they've been told and how poor the proof is of social training theory.
What I can tell you is that it's not that I disagree with people because they don't believe in Dinosaurs. It's that people who believe who don't usually have a LOT of others beliefs tied up in with that as well. Sure, they honestly even believe that Dinosaur believers are whack jobs and have millions of others of friends who believe in a 6000 year old earth. It's not that. It's that they believe and propagate a lot of crap (from my PoV) and don't like to be called on it. That's fine, but not everyone is obligated to tell them that "it's all good" It really isn't good for society and while it is easy not to push back and makes you friends, that is not a good reason for the rest of society to stop pushing boundaries.
In other words I don't care about your approval. I do care we push forward as a society and progress.