[quote]pushmepullme wrote:
prude.
[/quote]
In the context of the current discussion, this should elevate me to full of win status.
[quote]pushmepullme wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Yes, there was a lot more name calling in her post. “Thank god my parents didn’t program me to feel shame about bodily functions but to take responsibility for my needs and be proactive about meeting them - not just passive aggressively denying them and then attacking others who are not similarly shame-bound.”
I never commented on my sexuality, I was just noting that its as much a persons choice to fulfill desire as is not to.
“Just don’t try to be sexually conservative for me.”
Don’t worry, for you, I wouldn’t dare be conservative. (see what I did there?) [/quote]
Perhaps I’m being technical, but there was not name calling. She implied the people with poor communication skills might be passive aggressive, I suppose, but she actually only said that she is glad she isn’t. You’re projecting, prude.
;-)[/quote]
As to the name calling… A) I didn’t. Nice red herring.
B) I was addressing those who do the ‘slut’ name calling thing and what, from my observations, the basis of that may be.
C) I stated that I’m glad [i]I’m[/i] not passive aggressive or shame-bound.
Now, if a person reads what I wrote and thinks I’m talking about them - well, that’s either their projection or perhaps a recognition/acceptance of who they are. Feel free to assign yourself whatever role you want. Just don’t attempt to blame me for your choices.
I actually have empathy (and at times when I’m not at my best, derision) for those who are passive aggressive or shame-bound. Been there myself and it’s no fun (and, being human, I sometimes slip back into that territory as well).
I never touched on those who are sexually conservative.
I do believe it is possible to be sexually conservative out of a healthy place and not a PA/guilt/shame based one. But being sexually conservative does not ‘trump’ being sexually liberal, nor does it make one ‘moral’ or ‘amoral’ on it’s own. Both the SC and SL can be fucked up as hell, or they can be acting out of an emotionally healthy place. I simply believe that the majority of people who are sexually conservative aren’t that way out of health. ( Just my observation based on how [i]I[/i] define health. You may define it any way you want.)
From my experience, the SC are that way out of shame/guilt, lack of interpersonal skill, lack of access/opportunity, previous emotional/psychological trauma, or out of religious interference. To be fair, most of the SL people I know are that way for the exact same reasons.
Slut. 
[quote]karma wrote:
[quote]pushmepullme wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Yes, there was a lot more name calling in her post. “Thank god my parents didn’t program me to feel shame about bodily functions but to take responsibility for my needs and be proactive about meeting them - not just passive aggressively denying them and then attacking others who are not similarly shame-bound.”
I never commented on my sexuality, I was just noting that its as much a persons choice to fulfill desire as is not to.
“Just don’t try to be sexually conservative for me.”
Don’t worry, for you, I wouldn’t dare be conservative. (see what I did there?) [/quote]
Perhaps I’m being technical, but there was not name calling. She implied the people with poor communication skills might be passive aggressive, I suppose, but she actually only said that she is glad she isn’t. You’re projecting, prude.
;-)[/quote]
As to the name calling… A) I didn’t. Nice red herring.
B) I was addressing those who do the ‘slut’ name calling thing and what, from my observations, the basis of that may be.
C) I stated that I’m glad [i]I’m[/i] not passive aggressive or shame-bound.
Now, if a person reads what I wrote and thinks I’m talking about them - well, that’s either their projection or perhaps a recognition/acceptance of who they are. Feel free to assign yourself whatever role you want. Just don’t attempt to blame me for your choices.
I actually have empathy (and at times when I’m not at my best, derision) for those who are passive aggressive or shame-bound. Been there myself and it’s no fun (and, being human, I sometimes slip back into that territory as well).
I never touched on those who are sexually conservative.
I do believe it is possible to be sexually conservative out of a healthy place and not a PA/guilt/shame based one. But being sexually conservative does not ‘trump’ being sexually liberal, nor does it make one ‘moral’ or ‘amoral’ on it’s own. Both the SC and SL can be fucked up as hell, or they can be acting out of an emotionally healthy place. I simply believe that the majority of people who are sexually conservative aren’t that way out of health. ( Just my observation based on how [i]I[/i] define health. You may define it any way you want.)
From my experience, the SC are that way out of shame/guilt, lack of interpersonal skill, lack of access/opportunity, previous emotional/psychological trauma, or out of religious interference. To be fair, most of the SL people I know are that way for the exact same reasons.
Slut. ;-)[/quote]
Not to turn this away from the playful banter, but the way I see it, slut is used as an insult guys use because of the availability and access to sex women have and men do not. Men are really just jealous that a good looking woman can get sex pretty much at will with whomever they want while guys simply can not (unless they pay for it). So, guys turn it into a derogatory term. This is especially true during the less mature years.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]karma wrote:
[quote]pushmepullme wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Yes, there was a lot more name calling in her post. “Thank god my parents didn’t program me to feel shame about bodily functions but to take responsibility for my needs and be proactive about meeting them - not just passive aggressively denying them and then attacking others who are not similarly shame-bound.”
I never commented on my sexuality, I was just noting that its as much a persons choice to fulfill desire as is not to.
“Just don’t try to be sexually conservative for me.”
Don’t worry, for you, I wouldn’t dare be conservative. (see what I did there?) [/quote]
Perhaps I’m being technical, but there was not name calling. She implied the people with poor communication skills might be passive aggressive, I suppose, but she actually only said that she is glad she isn’t. You’re projecting, prude.
;-)[/quote]
As to the name calling… A) I didn’t. Nice red herring.
B) I was addressing those who do the ‘slut’ name calling thing and what, from my observations, the basis of that may be.
C) I stated that I’m glad [i]I’m[/i] not passive aggressive or shame-bound.
Now, if a person reads what I wrote and thinks I’m talking about them - well, that’s either their projection or perhaps a recognition/acceptance of who they are. Feel free to assign yourself whatever role you want. Just don’t attempt to blame me for your choices.
I actually have empathy (and at times when I’m not at my best, derision) for those who are passive aggressive or shame-bound. Been there myself and it’s no fun (and, being human, I sometimes slip back into that territory as well).
I never touched on those who are sexually conservative.
I do believe it is possible to be sexually conservative out of a healthy place and not a PA/guilt/shame based one. But being sexually conservative does not ‘trump’ being sexually liberal, nor does it make one ‘moral’ or ‘amoral’ on it’s own. Both the SC and SL can be fucked up as hell, or they can be acting out of an emotionally healthy place. I simply believe that the majority of people who are sexually conservative aren’t that way out of health. ( Just my observation based on how [i]I[/i] define health. You may define it any way you want.)
From my experience, the SC are that way out of shame/guilt, lack of interpersonal skill, lack of access/opportunity, previous emotional/psychological trauma, or out of religious interference. To be fair, most of the SL people I know are that way for the exact same reasons.
Slut. ;-)[/quote]
Not to turn this away from the playful banter, but the way I see it, slut is used as an insult guys use because of the availability and access to sex women have and men do not. Men are really just jealous that a good looking woman can get sex pretty much at will with whomever they want while guys simply can not (unless they pay for it). So, guys turn it into a derogatory term. This is especially true during the less mature years.[/quote]
Negatory Ghostrider. Just as this rule only applies to “attractive” sluts, Guys with game, can get it pretty much as frequently. There may be a slight advantage for the sluts, but a skilled male practitioner can run the field with many of the best sluts.
V
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Not to turn this away from the playful banter, but the way I see it, slut is used as an insult guys use because of the availability and access to sex women have and men do not. Men are really just jealous that a good looking woman can get sex pretty much at will with whomever they want while guys simply can not (unless they pay for it). So, guys turn it into a derogatory term. This is especially true during the less mature years.[/quote]
Agreed! Sour grapes, anyone? Also called being PA? One and the same. Guys want to be sluts but can’t be (since women control the pussy) so instead of being straightforward about it, they become passive in their role and aggressive toward the sluts they envy. Girls do the same thing - even though they could be sluts, they’re too fucked up on any number of levels to let themselves be who they want to be and are stymied in anger at this -so they take it out on the sluts who aren’t sexually repressed.
Just to reiterate - this is only addressing those who do the ‘slut’ name calling. If someone wants to be sexually conservative, that’s an entire different Oprah.
Damn shame.
If everyone just fucked who and when they wanted, there’d be a lot less of the attempts to demean and a lot more of life being enjoyed! Unfortunately, that means women (as a group) need to get their shit together…
[quote]Vegita wrote:
Negatory Ghostrider. Just as this rule only applies to “attractive” sluts, Guys with game, can get it pretty much as frequently. There may be a slight advantage for the sluts, but a skilled male practitioner can run the field with many of the best sluts.
V
[/quote]
LOL Love the “skilled male practitioner”! And so true…
Wait, something about a “fellatious assessment” ?
What’s up, guys?
[quote]ADvanced TS wrote:
If you see this, and you’re a bro, you know what to do.
[/quote]
Dude, I love you.
Bro’s, whats up with all these sluts posting in my thread trying to be cool with us bro’s, like theyre not slutbags?
On our campus Cuntass is a huge word or C.A. for short
Lmao, good find SickAbs
I want some of those shirts, they’re absolutely hillarious…
The slampiece ones and poundtown express… hahaha.
I’m gonna bro it up at the bar tonight… It’s my only choice
.
[quote]Vegita wrote:
Negatory Ghostrider. Just as this rule only applies to “attractive” sluts, Guys with game, can get it pretty much as frequently. There may be a slight advantage for the sluts, but a skilled male practitioner can run the field with many of the best sluts.
V
[/quote]
I know what you mean, but I still disagree. I agree a guy can get it whenever he wants, whoever is another story. There are just plan lots of women out there that aren’t going to sleep with anyone period.
Further, guys have to put in work to get some, girls just have to show up.
[quote]BJack wrote:
.[/quote]
To be fair that’s a guido not a bro, there’s a huge difference.
“For the most part, bros are very tolerant individuals. They realize all the bro-hatred that is out there caused by ignorance. But since bros are by definition the smartest people on the fucking planet, they realize there are people who are just not acceptable. Bros hate #89 hipsters, but even more than their aggression towards these freak shows is bros hatred of Guidos.”
Bros are dirtbags (unwashed ball sax, raw dogging slampigs, puking everywhere) while guidos are more metro(spray tans, tubs of hair gel, ironed shirts).
I tend to fall more on the bro side, however if theres a particular skank I’m trying to impress, I may trim down the gooch hair down to a 1 or 2 guard and shave around the shaft to get that extra half inch.
[quote]eic wrote:
Why play with around with “slut” or “bitch,” when you can go straight for “cunt”? Game-changer. [/quote]
Nah you got it all wrong women expect to be called bitch and slut now the magic has worn off, you call a woman an asshole and they have no come back and you win the interwebs
[quote]kevinm1 wrote:
[quote]eic wrote:
Why play with around with “slut” or “bitch,” when you can go straight for “cunt”? Game-changer. [/quote]
Nah you got it all wrong women expect to be called bitch and slut now the magic has worn off, you call a woman an asshole and they have no come back and you win the interwebs [/quote]
“You are what you eat, you big dick.”
if you wanna really shock them telling a girl to “shut your cockholster” will usually do
[quote]ADvanced TS wrote:
Bros are dirtbags (unwashed ball sax, raw dogging slampigs, puking everywhere) while guidos are more metro(spray tans, tubs of hair gel, ironed shirts).
I tend to fall more on the bro side, however if theres a particular skank I’m trying to impress, I may trim down the gooch hair down to a 1 or 2 guard and shave around the shaft to get that extra half inch.[/quote]
Its like youre a mirror of myself…bro.