RE: Full Control

RE: Full Control (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

ChatteParfaitt -> RE: Full Control (6/14/2011 7:06:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania quote: Are you really meaning to imply that the Bonobos' hyper sexuality is that close to human sexuality? If so, I will have to disagree. Bonobos have sex (I think the stat is 90% of the time) while in estrus, it just so happens they are in estrus more than most mammals. No, I am suggesting that as the closest relative to human beings that they resemble us most closely in regard to sexuality... That I would agree with. quote: My entire point was that human sexuality is unique for a reason. Natural Selection made some biological choices for us for a reason. The reason appears to be that humans will survive better if the female has more sexual freedom and gets more sexual pleasure. BTW: having sex is not a human imperative, but a biological one. Which tends to support the belief that human sexuality is unique for biological (not cultural) reasons. I would agree that the female sexual response is adaptive for the very reason that the female orgasm helps fertilization. Again, agreed. The above was a typo, I meant biological imperative... I do not think we disagree that human beings are animals, their mating adaptations are biological towards our species....what I am saying is that culture shapes how we view sexuality, who we believe it is okay to have sex with, how many partners are acceptable, etc etc etc... In other words, an assertion that caveman takes cavewoman by her hair, takes her into the cave, loves her and guards her pussy from all invaders, is not really one that is universal. There are many cultures where women take multiple lovers, or that sex outside of a romantic relationship is not considered to be bad or imprudent.... I agree. But I will reassert my position that in order for something to be a biological imperative it has to be universal (outside of culture). There is only one taboo, for example, that is universal, and that is the son/mother incest taboo (at least according to my socio-bio anthro class). The interesting thing about that is it is the one taboo we share with other primates. We clearly agree more than disagree, I just wanted to make a few points (most especially about the Bonobo) quite clear for those who (perhaps) don't have your background in anthropology. Cultural perspectives about female sexuality often clash with biological facts about our mating adaptions. From a purely biological point of view, females are "allowed" to receive great pleasure during sex, just as they are "allowed" great freedom of when, how, and who. Current culture bias about the three hole slut, for instance, is just that, a cultural bias perpetuated by both men and women, since human female sexuality is often perceived as something that needs to be restrained and controlled. The reason for that, however, are perhaps a good topic for another thread.

juliaoceania -> RE: Full Control (6/14/2011 7:13:26 PM)
[quote]Cultural perspectives about female sexuality often clash with biological facts about our mating adaptions. From a purely biological point of view, females are "allowed" to receive great pleasure during sex, just as they are "allowed" great freedom of when, how, and who. Current culture bias about the three hole slut, for instance, is just that, a cultural bias perpetuated by both men and women, since human female sexuality is often perceived as something that needs to be restrained and controlled. [/quote] Which is patriarchal idea furthered by many male dominated cultures... including our own. But things have been changing...

Awareness -> RE: Full Control (6/14/2011 10:35:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: catize ~~looks at you funny~~ [8\|] If two people give each other a good time, it is somehow wrong for her but not for him? I can think of several ways. She could be cheating, she could be knowingly infected with HIV, she could be his daughter, she could be misleading him about her intentions, her sanity and so on. Is your intelligence so amazingly pedestrian? quote: It has always amazed me when some guy can bed me, then think less of me. What on earth makes you think he thought particularly highly of you to begin with? Perhaps he didn't and you simply confirmed his notions. quote: If he was there with me and devalues my contribution to our mutual fun, I say he is the one who has self esteem issues. One of those folks who needs to convince himself of his own value by putting me down. Look this is all very salutary, but irrelevant to the point I was making. If you're going to interject, have the grace to understand the discussion first. quote: This may burst your smug little misogynistic bubble, but it will be a cold day in hell before I worry about what some men think of me and/or my sexual practices. Which is why you commented on what I said is it? Fuck, you people are so dim, it's like shooting fish in a barrel. Someone who didn't care what I thought, wouldn't even bother to fucking comment. Your very presence in this thread and the very statements you've made put the lie to that claim. Lord, sometimes I despair at the lack of thought and reason which goes into the average post here.

mnottertail -> RE: Full Control (6/14/2011 10:37:36 PM)
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooohhhhhh. That sort of post aint gonna get you alotta girls, though.

Awareness -> RE: Full Control (6/14/2011 10:41:45 PM)
Oh, I couldn't give a fuck. Women who know themselves rarely have a problem with the ideas I put forward because they don't feel threatened by them. Basically the attitude being presented is "Hey, I wanna be a slut but have you respect, protect and nurture me" which is kind of like a guy saying "Hey, I wanna lay on the couch all my life while you cook, clean and blow me". People with self-respect say no to both propositions for reasons which should be fucking obvious.

HeatherMcLeather -> RE: Full Control (6/14/2011 10:50:44 PM)
quote: Lord, sometimes I despair at the lack of thought and reason which goes into the average post here. Relax, Hanners is just in a bit of a mood. She'll be along shortly and you two can cheerfully insult each other to your heart's content.

HeatherMcLeather -> RE: Full Control (6/14/2011 10:53:27 PM)
quote: "Hey, I wanna lay on the couch all my life while you cook, clean and blow me" But but isn't that pretty much what Ron has been saying for over 30,000 posts?

juliaoceania -> RE: Full Control (6/14/2011 10:55:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Awareness Oh, I couldn't give a fuck. Women who know themselves rarely have a problem with the ideas I put forward because they don't feel threatened by them. Basically the attitude being presented is "Hey, I wanna be a slut but have you respect, protect and nurture me" which is kind of like a guy saying "Hey, I wanna lay on the couch all my life while you cook, clean and blow me". People with self-respect say no to both propositions for reasons which should be fucking obvious. My problems are not with anything you have said here, it is the implicit rejection that everyone who does not think like you is somehow mentally unwell, has low self esteem, and that no other man worth a shit feels differently. As far as what suits you personally in your mates, could give a fuck less. But when you start using evolutionary theory to justify your wrong headed ideas, I will definitely speak out about it.

catize -> RE: Full Control (6/15/2011 12:43:02 AM)
quote: Fuck, you people are so dim, it's like shooting fish in a barrel. Someone who didn't care what I thought, wouldn't even bother to fucking comment. Back atcha, Buck-o! [:D][:D][:D][:D]

SimplyMichael -> RE: Full Control (6/15/2011 11:42:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Awareness quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania I don't respect men that will stick their dicks in women they do not respect. It is creepy frankly. I would involve myself with a man that loved a slut before I would involve myself with a man that would only fuck one... Oh bollocks. Women are in no way attracted to men because of our virtues. quote: That is NOT the biological imperative. As someone who has studied evolutionary psychology to some degree on an academic level, it is about as theoretical as time travel. For you to make these blanket statements that all men in all cultures throughout all time view women the same way men in patriarchies do, well, it is just ludicrous. If you are going to claim such things, please support them Toots, super-string theory is fucking theoretical and there's an awful lot of money and brilliant theoreticians being poured into it. Evolutionary psychology is one psychological model and yes, there are others, however if you actually cared to look around you, there's a possibility you might - oh, I dunno - see traces of its possible application. The ditzy chick who wonders why a guy didn't bother with her after she blew him in a back alley within 15 minutes of meeting him is experiencing this reality. You not wanting to believe in it, doesn't change the fact that this is absolutely how men respond to women and what their underlying expectations are. You seem appallingly naive - men are implicitly territorial when it comes to women who they care about. There are very good reasons for this, but if you want to stick your head in the sand and pretend this doesn't happen, be my guest. I have no vested interested in what you believe, but if anyone seriously thinks the word 'slut' has been reclaimed by pre-pending it with 'ethical', then they are seriously fucking deluded. Your grasp of female psychology is a bit limited. You need to think in terms of bell curve and survival. Meaning you want some women who never open their legs as one end, women who sometimes do at the middle and women who always do at the other thin end of the curve. There are some amazingly high end women here who give men blowjobs in the first fifteen minutes of meeting them, they are just careful of who they do that with and virtue is a major part of why. Or perhaps my perspective is biased because well, we all know the reasons why.

dvart -> RE: Full Control (6/16/2011 7:05:50 AM)
quote: So if you are a bottom or a Top, be that. Be honest with yourself and with others. A Master is a guy who will cuddle his slave because she is ill, he will cook and yes even clean when he has too, because a true slave is a pearl beyond price, she will give everything she has, she will go to any length to be his. Trust me when I say if you ever have that, nothing else even comes close. He sure will not say fuck her, there's another one around the corner because there isn't. Wise words, analyticalmaster, thanks

LaTigresse -> RE: Full Control (6/16/2011 7:50:43 AM)
I missed that the first time and it is quite true. It's not like we are picking peaches here, with one being just as delectable as the next.

LillyBoPeep -> RE: Full Control (6/16/2011 1:53:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: aromanholiday quote: ORIGINAL: LillyBoPeep for the record, i don't believe all "3-hole sluts" (is that a new category for collarme? cause i'll totally sign on haha) are damaged goods without self respect. frankly, i think a lot of women would be sluttier if their reputations wouldn't suffer for it. =p This has evolved into such a strange thread. Men vs. Women on 3-hole-slutism. LOL, it's cute in a sense, although I'm sorry for all the hard feelings that have emerged. I don't know where I fit on the 3-hole-slut scale (although I do tend to think of myself as a 4-hole slut, so perhaps I am a bit confused? ;) ). For me, it's certainly not about reputation, I don't socialize enough to have any sort of reputation. I can go for years (you have no idea how many years) without having any sort of sex at all with anyone, turning down every male in sight, a Barred Iron Door of Virtuousness. This is because I refuse to be influenced by somebody who doesn't strike me as someone who should influence me--if that makes sense. I look for a right fit, and for me, that takes a very long time to find. I guess that's just another way of saying "highly selective." But if I do meet the right sort of man, it's all over. All doors are wide open. If he wants any number of my four holes on the first meeting (I can't call such things "dates," laughing), he's got them, as fast as I can get them out and where he wants them. Due to the type of relationship I always look for, by the time such a person and I meet face-to-face, I expect I'll already be doing absolutely everything he tells me to do and it would therefore be the rankest disobedience, not to mention hypocritical and a betrayal of my own most deeply-held principles, to refuse him anything in a face-to-face encounter, whether it be sexual or not. If that makes me a 3-hole-no-I-insist-upon-4 hole slut, then I am very happy and proud to be one! I don't make any moral distinctions between orders, they are all just orders and, if you want to be a slave, then all are equally important to obey. Some are painful, some are not. I do make that distinction. But I obey the painful ones with as much alacrity as the pleasurable ones, because the whole point is to obey anything you're told to do. Isn't it? for the life of me, i can't figure out what the 4th hole is? is that a family guy reference? haha or do you mean your mind, perhaps? hahahaha ^.^ but no, this is basically what i'm talking about. i'm a horrendously selective person, but totally open to "contained sluttiness" =p and i dont really have a problem with those girls who AREN'T contained, because hey, maybe that's the right thing for them -- who knows! =p i may have misinterpreted people who seemed to be coming across as if it was the 3-hole-sluttiness that made the girl a bad person, or if it was what seemed like willingness to sleep with random strangers, OR that she was somehow "imposing" this on a future Dominant -- frankly, i don't know or care. i'm a fan of sex, and i like it in various ways, and i'm a pretty good person besides.

Lucylastic -> RE: Full Control (6/16/2011 1:57:40 PM)
I remember when I started nursing, a female presented with chronic incontinence, turned out her husband was using her urethra instead of her vagina, no wonder she said sex hurt 4th hole maybe? just asking, having not read the entire thread, I just saw Lillys response go across the "ticker"

LillyBoPeep -> RE: Full Control (6/16/2011 2:29:57 PM)
OW!!! how on earth would that even work?

Lucylastic -> RE: Full Control (6/16/2011 2:33:10 PM)
brute force and a fair bit of ignorance I would think

LillyBoPeep -> RE: Full Control (6/16/2011 2:35:44 PM)
good gracious passes out

juliaoceania -> RE: Full Control (6/16/2011 3:35:12 PM)
I remember reading a book about sexual dysfunctions when I was in high school ( I cannot remember for the life of me what it was called) and there was a gynecologist that said there was a woman who came into his practice with her husband because her husband wanted her to get advice on how to become pregnant (she was like 30 yrs old), so he had a consultation with the pair, went and then examined her. He said that she had a vaginal opening so small that he could barely fit the tip of his finger inside of her... and she was ostensibly a 30 year old married virgin. He tells her that he can surgically alter her vagina to facilitate sex, and she says to him "No thank you doctor, I want to keep things just the way they are, and don't tell my husband about what you found in your exam". He was very disturbed, not knowing if her husband realized she had this condition, or what... It was the strangest medical story I had ever read.

Awareness -> RE: Full Control (6/16/2011 11:33:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael Your grasp of female psychology is a bit limited. No. It's not. quote: You need to think in terms of bell curve and survival. Meaning you want some women who never open their legs as one end, women who sometimes do at the middle and women who always do at the other thin end of the curve. I'm talking about male evolutionary psychology, not female. quote: There are some amazingly high end women here who give men blowjobs in the first fifteen minutes of meeting them, they are just careful of who they do that with and virtue is a major part of why. Or perhaps my perspective is biased because well, we all know the reasons why. No, not really. Women who think their virtue protects them are the easiest to seduce. Women are intensely vulnerable to the promise of sensuality. I always find it amusing that women often express disdain for men who lack self-control, then turn around and justify that same lack of self-control as a virtue or right. Try again. You obviously haven't thought this through.

NuevaVida -> RE: Full Control (6/16/2011 11:57:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LillyBoPeep for the life of me, i can't figure out what the 4th hole is? You're not the only one. And I don't want to think urethra, thank you very much!

Page: << < prev 7 8 9 [10] 11 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.1409912