Prisoners of Sex

[I.P.Freely]

What kind of horse shit is this? Guys fortunately don't generally murder women if they don't get laid? What a ****. Which, by the way, is the female equivalent of a prick. Someone that creates a problem apparently for the sole reason to have a cause to live for. If you don't want sex, don't do it. The fact is it's very rare for a guy not to want it, if they move on to a woman that is willing, where's the problem? You both got what you wanted.

A perfect example of choice.Attempting to stifle anyone's legal right to choose is obscene.

What are you talking about?

I'm agreeing with you, its a woman's right to accept or refuse sex.Just as it is her right to have an abortion or to carry the foetus to term.

 

[Iceweasel]

A perfect example of choice.Attempting to stifle anyone's legal right to choose is obscene.

What are you talking about?

I'm agreeing with you, its a woman's right to accept or refuse sex.Just as it is her right to have an abortion or to carry the foetus to term.

How did abortion become the issue and who wants to take away anyone's right to refuse sex?

 

[koshergrl]

The loons are proving the point of the article.

If one points out the negative impact of promiscuity, one is considered to be trying to deny women their right to have sex, and is evincing their own *unhealthy* sexual attitude and frigidity. Women who value themselves and attach some value to their sexuality are jeered at, ridiculed, and called names.

In other words, women who hold themselves with any value and who object to being objectified/subjected to lifestyles and attitudes which HURT them are marginalized/demonized.

Which is the point of the article.

 

[Swagger]

Er..I'm not a muslim.

Liking legs may or may not make you a chauvinist. I believe you pretty thoroughly missed the point of the article.

Liking legs doesn't make a man a chauvinist, but using the 'C' word does, which shart does do. Any man who uses that word, and uses it to verbally abuse a woman, is definitely a chauvinist. And, based on his posts in this thread, a hypocrite as well. A man who uses the 'C' word to verbally abuse a woman is no friend to women, on any level. It shows what he truly thinks of women.

If you had any idea of how much of a **** you've come across as by writing that, you wouldn't have posted it. Calling a woman a **** doesn't automatically make the person saying it a chauvanist, but it sure as hell makes the woman making such an accusation look like a bull-dyke feminist.

 

[Iceweasel]

The loons are proving the point of the article.

If one points out the negative impact of promiscuity, one is considered to be trying to deny women their right to have sex, and is evincing their own *unhealthy* sexual attitude and frigidity. Women who value themselves and attach some value to their sexuality are jeered at, ridiculed, and called names.

In other words, women who hold themselves with any value and who object to being objectified/subjected to lifestyles and attitudes which HURT them are marginalized/demonized.

Which is the point of the article.

Which is why it's stupid. She apparently thinks you are either promiscuous or celibate. She has a toggle switch for a mind, it's either this or that, nothing in between. But most people live in between.

 

[koshergrl]

No, I don't.

Misogynistic loons continue to not understand the premise of the article or my comments.

You don't get it. We already know. You can't even respond without using the most vile and offensive terms, lol.

 

[High_Gravity]

"
I’ve written before, in the context of the abuse that female writers take online, about this poisoned stream’s potential origins. The Santa Barbara case hints at one such source — the tension between our culture’s official attitude toward sex on the one hand and our actual patterns of sexual and romantic life on the other.
The culture’s attitude is Hefnerism, basically, if less baldly chauvinistic than the original Playboy philosophy. Sexual fulfillment is treated as the source and summit of a life well lived, the thing without which nobody (from a carefree college student to a Cialis-taking senior) can be truly happy, enviable or free.
Meanwhile, social alternatives to sexual partnerships are disfavored or in decline: Virginity is for weirdos and losers, celibate life is either a form of unhealthy repression or a smoke screen for deviancy, the kind of intense friendships celebrated by past civilizations are associated with closeted homosexuality, and the steady shrinking of extended families has reduced many people’s access to the familial forms of platonic intimacy.
Yet as sex looms ever larger as an aspirational good, we also live in a society where more people are single and likely to remain so than in any previous era. And since single people have, on average, a lot less sex than the partnered and wedded, a growing number of Americans are statistically guaranteed to feel that they’re not living up to the culture’s standard of fulfillment, happiness and worth.
Continue reading the main story
Continue reading the main story

Advertisement​

This tension between sexual expectations and social reality is a potential problem for both sexes, but for a variety of reasons — social, cultural and biological — it’s more likely to produce toxic reactions in the male of the species. Such toxicity need not lead to murder (as it usually, mercifully, does not) to be a source of widespread misery, both for the men who wallow in it and the women unfortunate enough to be targets for their bile. "


http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/01/opinion/sunday/douthat-prisoners-of-sex.html

I really think our culture puts too much value on sex.

 

[koshergrl]

It's not just over-valuing sex...it's when it's combined with the stigma that our culture attaches to anybody who dares to voice the opinion that perhaps some things (sex, for example) are meant to be approached with a certain reverence and reticence.

Look at the ridiculous attacks that are taking place in this thread right now...the language, the sneering, the ridicule...all because I posted an article that makes the claim that we have created an anti-woman culture via the meme that you can't be a *whole* woman unless you engage in, and/or promote, promiscuous sex....and if you are a young person and you aren't getting it, then the women are to blame....they're not doing what they're put on this earth to do...

Which is to provide sex. Not to have children. Not to be the example of a good wife and mother...but to provide sex. That, according to progressives, is a woman's highest calling, and anybody who questions that is a mentally ill, celibate, frigid, stupid, ugly **** who should be shunned.

 

[Iceweasel]

No, I don't.

Misogynistic loons continue to not understand the premise of the article or my comments.

You don't get it. We already know. You can't even respond without using the most vile and offensive terms, lol.

I responded to the author of the article, unless you wrote it, and posted the part that was loony. Yes I get it, saying that fortunately most men don't murder women that don't give them sex is a very passive aggressive comment. A female trait taken to the extreme. Like a very aggressive guy is a prick. That's why I called her a ****. Why is that the most vile thing you can think of?

 

[koshergrl]

A female didn't write the article.

*Yawn*.

 

[September]

I respect the choice of other woman who restrict themselves sexually. I have nothing against that. I understand your reasons, so all is good.

Until you start attempting to impose that mindset on me or women like me. Prancing around like the Virgin ******* Mary making me out to be the Whore of ******* Babylon.

Honestly I can relate to Babalon more than I can relate to the sex deprived mother of Christ.

But things don't always have to be so black and white.

 

[Iceweasel]

It's not just over-valuing sex...it's when it's combined with the stigma that our culture attaches to anybody who dares to voice the opinion that perhaps some things (sex, for example) are meant to be approached with a certain reverence and reticence.

Look at the ridiculous attacks that are taking place in this thread right now...the language, the sneering, the ridicule...all because I posted an article that makes the claim that we have created an anti-woman culture via the meme that you can't be a *whole* woman unless you engage in, and/or promote, promiscuous sex....and if you are a young person and you aren't getting it, then the women are to blame....they're not doing what they're put on this earth to do...

Which is to provide sex. Not to have children. Not to be the example of a good wife and mother...but to provide sex. That, according to progressives, is a woman's highest calling, and anybody who questions that is a mentally ill, celibate, frigid, stupid, ugly **** who should be shunned.

Our culture is getting more feminized every day. There is no anti-woman culture. Men are regularly ridiculed in popular media with women as being superior and smarter. Women have put themselves out as sex objects but it's the guy's fault? You don't live in reality.

 

[koshergrl]

Regarding your misogyny, ice, I suggest you take it up with your therapist. I don't have the time, or get paid, to figure out why you hate women, and the ways you make that obvious to the world.

 

[koshergrl]

Actually, the elevation of females over men base on nothing but their SEX (ESPECIALLY if they happen to be REALLY depraved) is more evidence that the premise of the article is absolutely true.

Women aren't admired for being honorable or smart...they are admired for being promiscuous, for promoting promiscuity, or for rejecting and or killing their children for the sakes of their careers.

They are admired for promoting misogyny.

 

[Katzndogz]

No one could do this to women without their permission. Many women want to be reduced to nothing but genitalia. Look at what women do to their bodies, fake breasts, fake asses, fake lips, all the exaggerate their sexual attributes and be more sexually attractive. It's very disappointing to see women reduced to nothing more than what's between their legs, at their behest! That's the worst part. They think they are liberated!

 

[Spoonman]

Actually, the elevation of females over men base on nothing but their SEX (ESPECIALLY if they happen to be REALLY depraved) is more evidence that the premise of the article is absolutely true.

Women aren't admired for being honorable or smart...they are admired for being promiscuous, for promoting promiscuity, or for rejecting and or killing their children for the sakes of their careers.

They are admired for promoting misogyny.

the problem that is happening today is women are being led to a choice. on their own, they are not saying i choose to be a sex object, or a prostitute or a pornstar, or promiscuous. Society, cultural changes, mostly driven by male perspectives and marketing set the standards. so women are choosing of their own free will, but what they are choosing is what they are being led to believe is where you want to be.

 

[Spoonman]

No one could do this to women without their permission. Many women want to be reduced to nothing but genitalia. Look at what women do to their bodies, fake breasts, fake asses, fake lips, all the exaggerate their sexual attributes and be more sexually attractive. It's very disappointing to see women reduced to nothing more than what's between their legs, at their behest! That's the worst part. They think they are liberated!

a good friend of mine, younger guy in his late 20's, had a really hot wife. both were very outdoorsy and physically active. big into mountain biking and stuff. she became like an excercise fanatic and really was in incredible shape. So she started doing these bikini contests and some fitness contests. and she was winning and doing really well. next she gets approached to do a shoot for some local foxes thing. and then for some Maxim Magazine thing. and it just kept mushrooming. nude, but covered up, semi nude, and so on. Then she got the fake boobs, which she totally didn't need. some work on her face which she totally didn't need. Now my friend who was onboard with it all early on is freaking out. He's like i don't even know my wife anymore, she doesn't even look the same. But she is feeding off the frenzy that gets created around her. it was never something she desired to do before hand.

 

[Iceweasel]

Regarding your misogyny, ice, I suggest you take it up with your therapist. I don't have the time, or get paid, to figure out why you hate women, and the ways you make that obvious to the world.

Disagreeing with you is not misogyny. I think you're a bit of a drama queen. Who makes women wear all the makeup, put on high heel shoes, etc. How that man's going? I prefer more down to Earth women, I wish they didn't sexualize themselves so.

Actually, the elevation of females over men base on nothing but their SEX (ESPECIALLY if they happen to be REALLY depraved) is more evidence that the premise of the article is absolutely true.

Women aren't admired for being honorable or smart...they are admired for being promiscuous, for promoting promiscuity, or for rejecting and or killing their children for the sakes of their careers.

They are admired for promoting misogyny.

The misogynists put them up to it? It's always some guy's fault if you go through life as a female victim. Like I said, they are often portrayed as smarter and superior to their male counterparts. I don't know how you came up with women not being admired as noble or smart. Many are CEOs, high level politicians, etc. Stop listening to the Mother ship.

 

[koshergrl]

What the hell are you even talking about?

Talk about mother ship.

 

[koshergrl]

Actually, the elevation of females over men base on nothing but their SEX (ESPECIALLY if they happen to be REALLY depraved) is more evidence that the premise of the article is absolutely true.

Women aren't admired for being honorable or smart...they are admired for being promiscuous, for promoting promiscuity, or for rejecting and or killing their children for the sakes of their careers.

They are admired for promoting misogyny.

the problem that is happening today is women are being led to a choice. on their own, they are not saying i choose to be a sex object, or a prostitute or a pornstar, or promiscuous. Society, cultural changes, mostly driven by male perspectives and marketing set the standards. so women are choosing of their own free will, but what they are choosing is what they are being led to believe is where you want to be.

And they're penalized for not choosing it.

Katz was right in saying women have been complicit in this...and so far, they do have a choice...

But you see the groanings of progressives to remove that choice. To make abortion mandatory in *certain* cases (poverty, for example...or when the father doesn't want the baby)...to remove all checks and balances that prevent abuse of women in vulnerable positions....(no oversight of abortion clinics, for example). Women won't always have a choice, if they have their way.

And I think they will, eventually. Not for long, but for a bit. It seems we always have to allow large-scale atrocities before we'll do anything.