RE: Controlling Women's Sexuality

RE: Controlling Women's Sexuality (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

somethndif -> RE: Controlling Women's Sexuality (8/2/2006 12:30:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LotusSong This is a serious question. Why do men feel compelled to controll a woman's sexuality? When a woman DOES embrase her sexuality, she is then called a slut, whore, and/or bitch? What frightens men so that they need to do this? I think you are quite right, that men are afraid on some level of women's sexuality and that there are a number of reasons for this. First, until very recently -- the late 1960's, early 1970's -- there was no reliable method of birth control. Couple that with the fact that men controlled wealth, and that they passed they passed their wealth on to their children, for most of history men had to control women's sexuality and in some way insure that their wives only fucked them.. If they didn't, then their wealth would be passed to someone else's child; someone not of their blood. So, monogamy was the result. And monogamy was enforced by religious, "moral" and societal means. But it has always been true that there were less restrictions on men. The old double standard. There is no term for men the equivalent of "slut." Men can fuck around, but if women do, they are sluts. Women pay a much greater price if they are promiscuous. Second, I also think that most men are afraid of women's sexuality. Women have a naturally superior and wonderful capacity for sex. A woman can literally fuck 50, 100, or more men in one day or night or both. A woman can have many, many partneres and many, many orgasms. Men, on the other hand . . . Well, we all know that men physically just cannot match what a woman can do sexually. We can't come close. In the end, I think that on some subconcious level men realize that if a woman really gives free rein to her innate capacity for sex, that no one man can satisfy her. So, again, in order to control women's capacity for sex, monogamy is the result, or at least the prevailing view for women seems to be don't have sex unless you are in a "long-term" relationship; unless you are "in love." Lest anyone get the wrong idea, I am not monogamous and I do not expect my submissive to be monogamous either. grin In fact, I am fascinated by women's sexuality, their greateer capacity for having sex and orgasms, and the differences between women's sexuality and men's sexuality. Dan

SirKenin -> RE: Controlling Women's Sexuality (8/2/2006 12:37:04 PM)
A male slut is a gigolo. A female is a slut or a whore. Hey, if you want to tramp around and brag about your 15 boyfriends and lovers, be My guest. You have that right. And I have the right to view you as a tramp. A lady of virtue is truly hard to find. To Me if a woman wants to spread her legs to anything with a dick she has serious mental issues and I do not want to be anywhere near her. I do not want to be wading My way through that slop either, thanks. But, some people do not care, or they like that and that is fine too. What other people want to do with their own lives is their own business, but if they are a breeding ground for everything from AIDS to scabes, they will know why. I hope they practice safe sex. But yeah, I have no desire to control them. I mind My own business and do My own thing. They are plenty capable of either minding their own affairs or experiencing the consequences.

amastermind -> RE: Controlling Women's Sexuality (8/2/2006 12:45:34 PM)
Let' get the terms right. A bitch either a sexually inactive woman or a woman that a male can't have sex with. A whore is a sexually active women whom everyone else is having sex with. A cunt is a sexually active woman that a male is using for sex. A slut is a woman whom a male wants to have sex with (often not too different from a whore) I hate this double standard bullshit. Males and females are very different physically, sexually, pshychologically and have different biological roles. Why should societal roles then be the same?

agirl -> RE: Controlling Women's Sexuality (8/2/2006 12:53:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LotusSong quote: ORIGINAL: agirl quote: ORIGINAL: LotusSong This is a serious question. Why do men feel compelled to controll a woman's sexuality? When a woman DOES embrase her sexuality, she is then called a slut, whore, and/or bitch? What frightens men so that they need to do this? Hello Lotus, I'm not sure I am understanding your question in the vein you may have meant...so will ask....... How do men control it? I'm haven't experience of men regarding women that way merely for enjoying sex...in fact, the opposite. In what context do you ask? Regards, agirl I am posing this outside of the lifestyle context. A sexually active woman is eventualy called a whore, cunt, bitch etc by a male/s that don't have her. There is the double standard, but that is not what I am addressing here. Why is it necessary to call names for what it is they create? If anything will kill the desire in a woman..that's it. (Gad- that was a hard one to disect). I wasn't thinking in lifestyle terms either.......but I think I am following what you are referring to now. These are some instant thoughts........It's pretty much been ok for chaps to sleep around* or sow their oats and whatnot....In general it's been accepted that men have the desire to spread their genes around while women desire to hang on to a chap to help provide for the raising of the ensuing offspring.....Women bear the fruits of fucking, while men create them only. If women fucked around in the past, how would the men KNOW that the offspring were theirs?.........LOL...Best to control it. I can't say that I'm familiar with the terms you have used in reference to a promiscuous woman.......slut yes.......and slapper also. Here, men also get referred to as tarts if they sleep around mindlessly and indiscriminately. agirl

Lashra -> RE: Controlling Women's Sexuality (8/2/2006 12:55:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen Hi I'm taking this as referring to more the social constraints which are placed on women's sexuality rather than anything in BDSM as such (where I find, almost anything goes!). Its difficult for us looking back through an age of christian censorship to know how pre-christian societies in Europe dealt with female sexuality. The church destroyed much of anything from the ancient world that referred to sexuality, and this destruction was prosecuted even more fully when it came to anything that dealt with female sexuality. Christianity has only two roles for women - that of the harlot and that of the pure virgin or mother. Basically this means that any woman who does not conform to the type of moralistic asexuality of the virgin or mother is a harlot - hence evil, hence due persecution and execution. That this heritage of the culture of Judaism found its way in similar form into Islam is noteworthy. At the same time, despite the destruction there is evidence that in the ancient world the roles and characters of women as multi-dimensional beings was known and acknowledged simply from the fact that there were so many Goddesses - some of whom were directly associated with the power of female sexuality. Freyja is a great example in this - a powerful, sexual woman not averse to using her sex for advantage, and yet not purely a "harlot" figure as the church would describe her - She is also Goddess of magic (for which read science, psychology, philosophy, writing etc in the modern world) the equal to Odin, a warrior, the uniter of couples and groups and so much more; a fully rounded woman in other words. It was not for nothing that independent, non conforming women even until quite recent times were condemned as witches - basically they had shown evidence of being drawn to the ancient ways. Why is female sexuality controlled in our society? Look to the church. Is this the right way for us? No - we had a different way long ago. Can we restore that ancient way? Probably not - but we can try and many of us already are trying and achieving this. E Beautifully put and right on the target. That is exactly what happened and hopefully we can restore things to the ancient way. I for one am trying. ~Lashra

fullofgrace -> RE: Controlling Women's Sexuality (8/2/2006 1:41:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyShimla Good Afternoon: quote: Oringinal: fullofgrace ...even in lysistrata, where women took over the control of the city to some extent, the only reason the comedy had a positive outcome is because women tried to control their own sexuality. When I read Lysistrata, it was funny because women used MEN'S sexual needs and desires in order to force the end of the war between Athens and Sparta and by denying men sexual fullfillment suceeded. Seems to me that the women were very much in control. well, the women did use men's sexual desires to their advantage by controlling their own sexuality, but if you remember, many of the women tried to break the oath they made to lysistrata by lying about why they needed to go home so that they could go have sex. women were portrayed as overly sexual in the play as well (especially in the beginning) - in a comic, exaggerated sort of way, but it's a reflection of the views of the society they lived in that women's sexuality had to be controlled and channeled in the proper direction through marriage.

fullofgrace -> RE: Controlling Women's Sexuality (8/2/2006 1:45:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: agirl These are some instant thoughts........It's pretty much been ok for chaps to sleep around* or sow their oats and whatnot....In general it's been accepted that men have the desire to spread their genes around while women desire to hang on to a chap to help provide for the raising of the ensuing offspring.....Women bear the fruits of fucking, while men create them only. If women fucked around in the past, how would the men KNOW that the offspring were theirs?.........LOL...Best to control it. this is a huge reason why women's sexuality has been controlled. the issue of inheritance in older cultures tied into this as well. i have to agree that jealousy and fear are also reasons, but not necessarily always.

LadyEllen -> RE: Controlling Women's Sexuality (8/2/2006 1:48:58 PM)
Hi Dincubus - thanks for that. I follow Asatru - you? (mail me direct if you like). Now amastermind - thank you for the definitive list of terms! However I have to say I have never heard the "see you next Tuesday" word used in that context although any woman who put up with it being applied to her without knocking the guy's head off, maybe deserves it. For anyone interested, that particular word is also one which comes directly from our pagan past, and which has been twisted into its current meaning long since - I'd suspect as a result of the vilification of female powers that accompanied the coming of the church. That word is derived from the runic name "kenaz", a rune with a meaning of "the will and the ability to create, transform and produce", it is the rune of the artisan and the forge. Its ideographic compatibility with male power (in the rune Ingwaz) and the power of birth (Berkana) shows that it is also tied in to the generation of offspring, where it is the rune of the womb - the forge of life. It is also strongly associated with erotic lust and sexual love (through its other meaning of "whip" incidentally!) - the will to create through the generation of sexual desire. As such, it is associated with the female as the partner who causes the male to succumb to her charms, as well as on account of its association with the womb itself. That that word - a holy word, has come to mean what it does now in relation to the female and also is the root of cunning (a trait mainly attributed negatively to women), is positively disgusting. For christians reading this who dont understand what I mean - this would be the same as me using the name christ as a word meaning shit. That the church has been permitted to engineer a situation where females are relegated and vilified, even to the point of taking what is holy about them and giving it a negative connotation, is more than enough for me to want to see the end of it. Next up - societal roles. Again, its difficult to see past the smoke from the christian fires as they burned their way through our ancient culture, but enough survives from this vandalism for us to see that in former times women held all manner of societal roles, including those of warrior and leader as well as owning and running their own farms, (stocked with plenty of male slaves!). We also have enough left to us to know that women in Germanic paganism had significant legal rights sometimes in excess of their menfolk and equal status before the law. All of this changed to relegation, second class citizenship, vilification and control under christian influence because in christianity women are chattles, just as in the other desert religions of the unholy land, that require male husbandry on account of them being second before god and prone to revert to "harlotry" if given the chance to do so. Yes of course males and females are different - but there is nothing that a man can do that a woman cant do and vice versa. Having said that, we also tend to have respective strengths and weaknesses - for example, females are generally better than males at anything requiring social cooperation, whilst males are generally physically stronger and thus better at physical labour. The thing is though, we are now past the point (I hope) at which women have no right to be or act unless under the supervision of a male - women have a right to choose their societal role in just the same way that men do, and that men dont like it is more evidence of the fear they feel at being outdone by a woman than anything else. That many males then resort to workplace bullying and harassment of women "to put them in their place" and overlook women for promotion in favour of less able men, just adds to the impression of fear I see. Men have to deal with our changing society, and learn to live with the fact that women are people too. That our society is changing in this way is wonderful and about time. The old fashioned christian social roles are being swept away at last, and as time goes on and women reassert their ancient Germanic freedoms and celebrate their female power, I look forward to a society far more suitable for us than that imposed on us in former times. E

amayos -> RE: Controlling Women's Sexuality (8/2/2006 1:57:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LotusSong This is a serious question. Why do men feel compelled to controll a woman's sexuality? When a woman DOES embrase her sexuality, she is then called a slut, whore, and/or bitch? What frightens men so that they need to do this? I have no interest in degrading a female's sexual craving. I encourage the inner whore to manifest in her outward personality as much as possible. I adore the techniques of mental simplification where she is made into a single-minded cock worshipping animal, feeding voraciously on sperm. I don't consider the words slut, whore, cunt, twat or bitch to be negative at all. They are pleasant, flowery synonyms for her, and if she doesn't think so at first, I'll convince her eventually.

popeye1250 -> RE: Controlling Women's Sexuality (8/2/2006 1:59:06 PM)
Lotus, I haven't a clue! Myself, I LIKE it!!!

LotusSong -> RE: Controlling Women's Sexuality (8/2/2006 2:07:32 PM)
quote: I wasn't thinking in lifestyle terms either.......but I think I am following what you are referring to now. These are some instant thoughts........It's pretty much been ok for chaps to sleep around* or sow their oats and whatnot....In general it's been accepted that men have the desire to spread their genes around while women desire to hang on to a chap to help provide for the raising of the ensuing offspring.....Women bear the fruits of fucking, while men create them only. If women fucked around in the past, how would the men KNOW that the offspring were theirs?.........LOL...Best to control it. I can't say that I'm familiar with the terms you have used in reference to a promiscuous woman.......slut yes.......and slapper also. Here, men also get referred to as tarts if they sleep around mindlessly and indiscriminately. agirl Which is EXACTLY why I think all properties and offspring should carry the WOMAN's last name.. You ALWAYS know who the mother is. (However, when my mother was preganant with me- she wasn't sure if she wasn't sure it was her's) :)

LotusSong -> RE: Controlling Women's Sexuality (8/2/2006 2:12:02 PM)
<<I don't consider the words slut, whore, cunt, twat or bitch to be negative at all. They are pleasant, flowery synonyms for her, and if she doesn't think so at first, I'll convince her eventually. >> This is what I mean. Would you call her the "N" word? Probably not because words do carry power. Now I think "needle-dick bug- fu*ker pinhead" is rather elequent.. but I dont' see any male eventually endearing himself to it :) No matter HOW I meant it.

amayos -> RE: Controlling Women's Sexuality (8/2/2006 2:17:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LotusSong <<I don't consider the words slut, whore, cunt, twat or bitch to be negative at all. They are pleasant, flowery synonyms for her, and if she doesn't think so at first, I'll convince her eventually. >> This is what I mean. Would you call her the "N" word? Probably not because words do carry power. Now I think "needle-dick bug- fuker pinhead" is rather elequent.. but I dont' see any male eventually endearing himself to it :) No matter HOW I meant it. Laughs In fact, many servile men adore being so ridiculed and belittled with such names—and there are all too many humiliatrixes out there who just love thinking them up. You yourself have talent here, it seems. P.s. "N" word?

agirl -> RE: Controlling Women's Sexuality (8/2/2006 2:25:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LotusSong quote: I wasn't thinking in lifestyle terms either.......but I think I am following what you are referring to now. These are some instant thoughts........It's pretty much been ok for chaps to sleep around* or sow their oats and whatnot....In general it's been accepted that men have the desire to spread their genes around while women desire to hang on to a chap to help provide for the raising of the ensuing offspring.....Women bear the fruits of fucking, while men create them only. If women fucked around in the past, how would the men KNOW that the offspring were theirs?.........LOL...Best to control it. I can't say that I'm familiar with the terms you have used in reference to a promiscuous woman.......slut yes.......and slapper also. Here, men also get referred to as tarts if they sleep around mindlessly and indiscriminately. agirl Which is EXACTLY why I think all properties and offspring should carry the WOMAN's last name.. You ALWAYS know who the mother is. (However, when my mother was preganant with me- she wasn't sure if she was the mother) :) Reminds me of a Chris Rock rant about lying...Who tells the biggest lies.?....lol Here, we have a programme that's rather like Jerry Springer, where, for some unphathomable reason, people air their doubts regarding paternityof their little ones to the nation and have DNA tests. The results of these are given on air.... absolutely degrading. EEEE -bloody-YUK. The fact that women could lie about paternity worked for them in instances......not quite the case today. At least if men fuck around, women don't end up raising the products........LOL agirl

LotusSong -> RE: Controlling Women's Sexuality (8/2/2006 3:14:14 PM)
<<In fact, many servile men adore being so ridiculed and belittled with such names—and there are all too many humiliatrixes out there who just love thinking them up. You yourself have talent here, it seems. P.s. "N" word? >> The N word.. it's a racial slur. If you do not know it. You have no need to learn it now :) Actually, when I need to humilate my Slave.. I call him "sir".

amayos -> RE: Controlling Women's Sexuality (8/2/2006 3:23:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LotusSong Actually, when I need to humilate my Slave.. I call him "sir". Now that's sly.

LotusSong -> RE: Controlling Women's Sexuality (8/2/2006 3:26:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: amayos quote: ORIGINAL: LotusSong Actually, when I need to humilate my Slave.. I call him "sir". Now that's sly. The reason being.. he is very proud to be mine in that capacity. for me to address him as another "level" is like a slap in the face to him. Nothing sly about it. Rather mean actually. But it gets my point across.

Dtesmoac -> RE: Controlling Women's Sexuality (8/2/2006 3:38:31 PM)
The historical place of christianity seems reasonable however if the other great faiths Budist, Shinto, Hindu etc are looked at the societies in which these faiths are the majority also tend to have a negative connotation of promsicuous women. So perhaps it is not from a relgious context that it comes but from the "past" male aggresive psychi. When an enemy was defeated part of the spoils were the women. Therefore if you are powerful and high staus "your" women must clearly be seen to be the opposite of women from a defeated city / country / nation. So a societies and an individuals status and power is reflected by the extreme purity they can impose on "their" women.

TreSwank -> RE: Controlling Women's Sexuality (8/2/2006 3:53:40 PM)
WARNING: UNPOPULAR OPINION BELOW Since a man's biological purpose, from the scientific standpoint, is to spread his genetic information as much and as widely as possible, promiscuity in men is highly tolerated. On the same token, a woman, whose purpose (according to this school of thought) is making the best and most thorough decisions as pertains to mate-selection, may be viewed as biologically irresponsible if she has sex indiscriminately- thus an abdication of her reproductive responsibilities.

LotusSong -> RE: Controlling Women's Sexuality (8/2/2006 3:53:48 PM)
Now if females are so prized.. why do some cultures treat them like sh*t? I am of the opinion that it isn't the women that are the prudes... it is the men. Women figured the best way to get ahead was to sell their bodies. And the market is fierce. It's the MEN who outlaw it although they partake of it. It boggles the mind! And if a man's seed is so precious... THEY should be the ones more discriminating as to where they put it. Then if the woman want's to couple with the male of her choice... she'll do what it takes to get there.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125