I said i appreciate scientific thinking, but not to the exclusion of all else. Extremes of any sort should usually be avoided. To view everything in the cold, matter of fact, dry manner of purely scientific thinking will create a rift between mind and emotion. Abstract, artistic or intuitive expression enables both to meet and function harmoniously. Science and logic is the mental equivalent of square grids. It is a very useful way of organising data, but it is useless for getting a complete picture of a world that is multidimensional, not digital linear. My problem isn't with individual bumboys, it's with a gay agenda. Now, rather than just being tolerant of gays, society is becoming overly zealous about the whole issue. It is being touted as completely normal (in gay 'fairy tales' for 4 year olds etc), and completely equal to heterosexual coupling, which it isn't. I think heterosexual couplings should always be presented as the default, and anything else as a deviation from the norm. After all, we all need a male and female parent to be created, so it isn't just based on an assumption or manmade rule that this is a harmonious situation. The opposite sexes are designed to physically compliment each other. Anything else is a deviation from this law of nature (not logic). Gays are a minority. To promote homosexuality in nursery books intended to for the majority might actually cause sexual confusion for children who wouldn't otherwise have had any problems.
On the scientific front with the gene argument that the gay lobby loves to bring up. There really is no science to that at all. If we can agree that, in a given group of males, there will be some taller than others. And then trace that to a gene. Then that means there is a gene for tall or a gene for short but not a gene for horse race jockeys or basketball players. Guess what there are varying levels of masculinity in a crowd. I'm fairly certain this could be traced to a gene. And this means...... ? Well apparently it means what the gay lobby wants to say that it means. Take a look at this thread beginning to end and I do not see Nursey assaulting the gay people of this world but simply making a case against the "proposed" common consensus. The popularly and politically correct point of view. As a matter of fact I bet she like myself has friends that are gay and it is not a huge point of focus. I personally disagree with the gay lifestyle and have gay friends it is not a huge problem. I have friends that have gambling problems I think their idiots also. No body is perfect it is a character flaw.
Did you see that show up on the top of the page? I have Google Adsense ads up but have them set to only show text ads. There should be no image ads showing at all, especially not crap like that.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I wouldn't say it is a character flaw. I would say that it is a predetermined preference. Didn't Penn and Teller call bullshit on this guy? Richard Cohen is an American "sexual reorientation coach" who believes homosexual people can be transformed into straight ones and cites himself as an example. Such therapies are, of course, extremely controversial and Cohen is more controversial than most who practice them.
This gay problem and the destruction of families through feminism I believe is part of the same master plan, we're being rapidly evolved via scientific means, once cloning moves onto humans, and everyone is infertile, sexless etc, then we wont have much of our humanity left.
You know there are movements of people involved in the traditional feminist movement that are saying "Time out" this is not what we were all about when we started. It seems as if it has turned into the Masculinization of Women movement and the ones paying the penalty are the women who want to be a mom for instance. Mention traditional role for women within the femanazi circles and what the fireworks begin. The family suffers when the kids are raised by "The Machine" instead of by the family. And then the Country as a whole suffers. Where are the rights for the stay at home mom?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,291858,00.html Is this guy being needlessly prosecuted and prejudiced for what really amounts to a natural instinctive urge? I bet a paycheck if you took a hundred people just like him with the same specific perversion. (not just sex offenders in general) I bet you could trace a common gene trait. But would that make it right? That article Barry posted by that scientist was pretty impressive. Specifically the interesting point about the frontal lobe injury of the rail worker.
I personally never wanted to be a mother, so I chose not to have children. A lot of mothers have to work to support their families. Even with the "old fashioned" two parent households, mothers have to work in order to make ends meet. And then there is the other side of the coin... welfare mothers who abuse the system and pop out kids to make $$$ -or- they have a kid and suck their ex for all they are worth for "child support" when in reality, they are using that money on themselves. I think a lot of times, the guy gets the shitty end of the stick. The welfare system in this country is fucked. No one is looking out for the children.
Amen sister! All of the problems you pointed out including the mother having to work to make ends meet. Feminism baby!
Well...some women anyway. The ones who behave in accordance with the stereotype. "You would be surprised about what we really think about you guys and sex". You sound like a vacuous, daytime television presenter or a columnist for some cliche-filled women's magazine. I don't need to lie about sex...because...i don't lie about it. Get it? If you can't be open and honest with the person you part your legs to, why part your legs to them? Oh yeah, you don't.
And you sound like some sucky christian teen pop song. I bet you have made "love" to all your boyfriends too. Go ahead and make yourself sound like some special "breed" of woman. I call bullshit on you. You didn't mention what you don't lie about. So are you just not telling your partners everything? Because that is the same as lying, you know. If you deeply love someone, yes... tell them the truth. (I'm honest with my bf) But as for all guys in general or for those who we have simply "fucked", no; ignorance is bliss. And maybe the reason that I sound like a Cosmo magazine article or numerous books is because there is truth in it. Women read this shit and laugh because they know that they are guilty of it. I've talked about sex with a lot of women and we could laugh ourselves to tears when talking about sex. I guess most women aren't as spiritual as you (not the younger ones anyway) and into meditation and tantric mumbo jumbo. I always thought that shit was for older women who are trying like hell to get their raw sexuality back. It's fucking instinct... not some new age state of mind. I can't help but picture those old fucking freaks on HBO's "Real Sex". Oh, yeah.. I do, just not as often as I once did, but I'm sure that there is a pill for that so I can add it to the plethora on my night stand.
[quote="Nauseous]And you sound like some sucky christian teen pop song.[/quote] Well, that's just one of the risks i have to take to make this information available to the masses. I'm well aware of what is considered 'cool', but i prefer to be honest about it. And if that happens to, at times, parallel what devout christians believe, then so be it. I'm not going to refrain from saying what i honestly think because of that. I don't believe people should murder each other either...am i sounding born again, now? Though you really do sound like a stereotypical, neurotic, fucked up bimbo at times. Just like your hero Anna Nicole. I think you're more intelligent than that, but pretty silly and just need a bit of a slap around. And i'm happy to do that for you, dear Pukesy. Of course not. How would i know the difference if that was the case? I've experienced both ends of the fucky pole and found that sex for purely physical reasons with someone you don't have an intimate bond with, although physically exhilerrating, is completely worthless and hollow. Only superficially satisfying, leaving the other 50% of your being neglected and alone. The kind of sex all the Lindsay Lohans of the world have as their preferred mode, in her case, with other people's boyfriends. Love? Truth? Want to join my christian pop band? Well in that case it's different...but then you keep changing what you say. First you describe you and your partner's sex life as a highly mechanical, superficial act...then when i point this out you say it's because you don't have any sex at all these days and for this reason are a bit jealous of those who do, making you say such cynical sounding stuff. Then you say that actually, you do have sex occasionally. Then you come out with moronic sounding cliches about 'when we women get together' what 'we all think about you guys and sex', and that women 'all lie about it'. Now you tell me that is only about previous boyfriends who you just fucked...or had a purely physical mechanical sex life with and that you have a loving, honest relationship with your current partner. It's constant contradictions. But you do look really 'cool'. How? By being honest? All of us are "special breeds" if we're authentic. Otherwise we are just stereotypically conditioned clones. I'm not saying i'm 100% perfect, but on the whole i'm pretty good at communicating. At worst i won't say what's on my mind, but i wouldn't outrightly lie. It's pointless...how can sex be to your liking if you don't give the other person honest feedback? In fact i'm occasionally a bit brutal in my honesty. Sometimes if something has been subtley building up, like the frog in a pan of cold water on a stove, it's only when it reaches boiling point does it realise the problem, creating a sharp response. I made reference to Eastern meditation and tantric practices only to show the ultimate level of harmonious sexuality as has been practiced in traditional cultures. And 'practiced' by whacked out new age Americans who are up their own asshole. Just because a bunch of assholish Californians are now giving each other touchy-feely, tantric 'yoni' massages, doesn't negate the value of the ancient knowledge they are 'digging'. So is the Karma Sutra (Indian) or the Perfumed Garden (Arabic) a load of airy-fairy crap as well? 'Don't throw out the baby with the bathwater', as they say. But no, i don't meditate or study tantrism. I'm sure i would benefit from it if i did, though. I wouldn't allow a bunch of assholish new agers or christian pop bands to put me off what i have evidence to believe is true. But there are other ways of experiencing such all openness. Just not quite so wholesome. But it's mainly down to honesty, relaxation and trust/security. Taking substances or meditating just focus and increase the power. I think a pill for schizophrenia should clear up most of your problems.
Much like my most recent reply, you didn't put a lot of thought into that last sentence. I'm no where close to being schizophrenic, so put down the trout, Barry. Delusions — personal beliefs not based in reality, such as paranoia that you're being persecuted or conspired against Bizarre delusions — for example, a belief in Martians controlling your thoughts Hallucinations — sensing things that don't exist, such as imaginary voices Incoherence Lack of emotions or inappropriate display of emotions A persistent feeling of being watched Trouble functioning at work or in social situations Social isolation Difficulty with personal hygiene Clumsy, uncoordinated movements
I didn't twist your words, i just pointed out the contradictions, or how your posts have come across. The comment to Disorder might have been said in a jokey manner, but was still nonetheless true as you then went on to prove by further explaining the reasons behind it. It's just when i see stuff that sounds like it's been lifted practically word for word straight from a women's magazine or some equally stereotyping guff, it gets up my nose, especially as it's supposed to be about me too ("all women lie about sex" etc).{Edit: ok, you didn't say that exactly, but near enough} Blanket generalisations like that just help to widen the gulf between the sexes. I just meant that sometimes i might not always readily communicate what's on my mind. As i said earlier, mind expanding substances. Such as mushrooms or mdma. Settle down. It was just a sarcastic reference to your contradictory posts.
That guy on the left resembles my ex boyfriend who after we broke up had this friend "Charlie" (who acted like a total fag and wore those really tight fag shirts) and they were always together. Then his former best friend and I were hanging out one night and he told me that he always thought that my ex was gay. I think I dated another gay guy once. He was a little too "artsy". I think the guys that are really "artsy" are a little "gay". He painted his fucking toenails pink. I didn't see this until after we had sex. He also liked to wear my mascara. Not to gay-bash, but I had an AIDS test after our relationship ended.
Please also note that I dont 'have' to take 45 mins, that was just a brag, of my rough average which is about 30-45 (3 hours record, but I was on phet too and we did it a couple times), and whatever you might have experienced with another guy, including any issues regarding 'ease of access' would be just that, your experience with Man A, is nothing like me, Man B, who is likely more sensitive to a womens needs than you might realise and who also includes a lot of foreplay (and mid play, and after play) seeing as a I do everything I can that would please the woman while also considering my own needs. I'm really not like the 'average' stereotype male, as you describe. Perhaps you just need someone who makes an effort and also drives you to make an effort, then your experiences might not seem so lackluster.
