Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 202
  1. #141  
    Wow, an intelligent discussion on sex and gender roles. Without posturing and proselytizing. I'm not use to seeing this at work. (am lucky that my wife likes to talk "deep"). I appreciate the women's perspective also.

    K.Cannon wrote:
    "I'm not particularly interested in up-close and personal pictures of someone I don't know (read as: not my husband) and I am not really interested in watching some people I don't know have sex. Whether that stems from "nature" or "nurture," I don't know."

    My wife recently said the same thing almost word for word. She says it's much more "sexy' and a "turn on" to get a backrub (from me) after I've cleaned out the garage and put the boys to bed while she had some time in the studio alone.

    I, on the other hand (no pun intended), get aroused by the sound of my visor (Big Clock!) waking me up and pretty much stay that way until I fall asleep at night. That sounds like I'm aroused by my Visor (heh)! I guess I'm trying to say that I'm pretty much "ready to go" all my waking hours. And it's been over ten years since we got together. Probably why I feel that porn is a waste of time. I also think Viagra is useless. Chocolate, on the other hand, is indespensible.

    ****-richardson wrote:
    "Personally, I'm not happy unless I've wacked off at least 7-8 times a day."

    Where do you find the time? (Well, I guess if people can find the time to smoke...)
    "I am a debtor both to Greeks and to Barbarians, both to the wise and to the foolish."
  2. #142  
    Originally posted by linguas

    Couldn't the same argument be made for men's view of porn? (Although I am in no way implying that there is anything "better" about it.)
    Good point. Although someone eating chocolate is not likely to hurt someone else's feelings...
  3. #143  
    Originally posted by BobbyMike
    ****-richardson wrote:
    "Personally, I'm not happy unless I've wacked off at least 7-8 times a day."

    Where do you find the time? (Well, I guess if people can find the time to smoke...)
    It was an exaggeration. I thought it seemed to be an absurd amount, but I guess it's feasible. I'm more like the "60 minute man" (and did I tell you about my ocean-side property for sale?).
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  4. #144  
    Originally posted by BobbyMike
    My wife recently said the same thing almost word for word. She says it's much more "sexy' and a "turn on" to get a backrub (from me) after I've cleaned out the garage and put the boys to bed while she had some time in the studio alone.
    In a previous quote I gave couple of examples of things that put me in the mood (without trying to give too much info). After I posted that message, I realized that neither of them were "touchy-feely" (i.e. emotional) things. In fact, one was the way my husband smells and the other was the way he looks--both very non-emotional senses. (And I did previously admit to briefly lingering over the covers of his Men's Journal magazines with muscle-y men on them, so I'm not trying to say that I don't think anyone else is attractive, just that I have no desire to take the magazine off into some corner by myself...)

    I guess I'm trying to say that I'm pretty much "ready to go" all my waking hours. And it's been over ten years since we got together.
    I think that most men don't realize what a powerful turn-on it can be to a woman when their guy is turned on by them. Congrats on your 10 years! Keep it up!

    Wow, an intelligent discussion on sex and gender roles. Without posturing and proselytizing.
    Isn't it great! Although, I feel like I am the only woman participating and, therefore, trying to answer all y'all's questions and, basically talking too much. (Just like a woman! )In fact, I'll try to cut out my near-constant responses and thanks! to all of you for a mature discussion!
  5. #145  
    Originally posted by ****-richardson
    I'm more like the "60 minute man" (and did I tell you about my ocean-side property for sale?).
    TOO MUCH INFORMATION!!
    The light at the end of your tunnel has been disconnected due to non-payment. Please remit funds immediately for restoration of hope.
  6. #146  
    Originally posted by Yorick
    My sister, for one, actively collects them.
    Which is great, if she likes them...but I'm a woman who doesn't really care to read how Kathleen, she with sea-green eyes and long black hair was ravished by Clive, the pirate with a heart of gold and a front tooth to match.

    Which makes my point: Men and women are different...but men and men and women and women are different, too!

    Okay, I've REALLY got to catch up on the last 2 day's work!
  7. #147  
    Originally posted by K. Cannon


    Good point. Although someone eating chocolate is not likely to hurt someone else's feelings...
    Nor should masturbation. disclaimer: sweeping generalizations follow. Men will sleep with a wide variety of women and form serious relationships with few. A man could sleep with a good looking woman, that woman could get hit by a truck on her way out of his apartment, and the man would merely mourn the loss of a "nice ***." Very few women can do that, because sex goes hand in hand with emotional attachment. I think a man being monogomous in a relationship is a great gift that a woman doesn't necessarily understand because that's just part and parcel of being in a relationship. I'm not saying that the woman doesn't give as much, she gives differently.
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  8. #148  
    Originally posted by K. Cannon
    Women may be thought to be more into the emotional/psychological side of the relationship, but sex is in and of itself a physical activity. No amount of emoting is going to bring a woman (or a man) sexual satisfaction.
    Depending on one's definition of 'sexual satisfaction', two words could disprove this: 'wet dream'. The brain has more to do with it than people want to admit.

    In a separate post:
    Good point. Although someone eating chocolate is not likely to hurt someone else's feelings...
    You don't think a woman telling her man that she is more satisfied by chocolate than by him could hurt his feelings?

    Originally posted by linguas
    Couldn't the same argument be made for men's view of porn? (Although I am in no way implying that there is anything "better" about it.)
    Definitely. I actually considered making that very point (more as a prosecution of substituting chocolate for relationships rather than a defense for porn, though ).
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  9. #149  
    Originally posted by ****-richardson
    Nor should masturbation.
    My rather lengthy discussion of this topic has been limited to pornography only, not sole masturbation. Pornography + masturbation is not the same as masturbation alone. In fact, I agree with your earlier take on this particular point.

    A man could sleep with a good looking woman, that woman could get hit by a truck on her way out of his apartment, and the man would merely mourn the loss of a "nice ***."
    Oh, c'mon...now you would have me believe that men have no interest in human life??

    because sex goes hand in hand with emotional attachment.
    See my point above...crying/smiling/emoting just doesn't really take anyone all the way, ****-richardson. Physical contact is what does it. (If we're talking about pure sexual gratification and not implications of a relationship.)

    I think a man being monogomous in a relationship is a great gift that a woman doesn't necessarily understand because that's just part and parcel of being in a relationship. I'm not saying that the woman doesn't give as much, she gives differently.
    Well, then, I reckon I'm gonna have to go home and give my husband a great big ole Thank You. Hope he remembers that I like the physical stuff too and not just the romantical emoting!
  10. #150  
    Originally posted by ****-richardson
    Men will sleep with a wide variety of women and form serious relationships with few.
    I think that sort of goes back to the biological/reproductive imperative, since a male is able to mate for reproduction frequently and without discretion, but the female is limited to when she's ovulating.
    This, I think, would lead to the emotional attachment, or lack therof.
    The light at the end of your tunnel has been disconnected due to non-payment. Please remit funds immediately for restoration of hope.
  11. #151  
    Originally posted by Toby


    Depending on one's definition of 'sexual satisfaction', two words could disprove this: 'wet dream'. The brain has more to do with it than people want to admit.
    Damn you, Toby, Damn you for always having evidence! Of course, the brain controls the entire body. Emotions and the brain are not exactly the same thing.

    You don't think a woman telling her man that she is more satisfied by chocolate than by him could hurt his feelings?
    LOL
  12. #152  
    Originally posted by K. Cannon
    ...Oh, c'mon...now you would have me believe that men have no interest in human life??...
    Not at all. Trying to illustrate a general man's ability to have sex without emotional attachment. I picked a poor example.
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  13. #153  
    Originally posted by K. Cannon
    See my point above...crying/smiling/emoting just doesn't really take anyone all the way, ****-richardson. Physical contact is what does it. (If we're talking about pure sexual gratification and not implications of a relationship.)
    I disagree. I could sit here and rub myself all day without getting a hard on. My wife looks at me and I could drive nails. I've heard of women that can orgasm without any physical contact whatsoever. I'll do my damnedest to hunt down a link, but trying to phrase the search criteria will be tricky.
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  14. #154  
    Originally posted by ****-richardson
    I'll do my damnedest to hunt down a link, but trying to phrase the search criteria will be tricky.
    or at least educational....
  15. #155  
    Originally posted by Toby
    Definitely. I actually considered making that very point (more as a prosecution of substituting chocolate for relationships rather than a defense for porn, though ).
    Actually, I didn't say this as a defense for porn, but rather to illustrate that many men may just see porn as a carefree, no-strings-attached pleasure.
    Maybe too much is read into the fact that men enjoy porn - could it be that it isn't necessarily a substitute for a "real" relationship at all? (not now, honey, I just got the latest Penthouse! )
    Eschew obfuscation!
  16. #156  
    Originally posted by ****-richardson
    I disagree. I could sit here and rub myself all day without getting a hard on. My wife looks at me and I could drive nails.
    My attempted point was that emotions only do not result in sexual gratification. You seem to now be making the point that you need emotion for sex...which is the opposite of the earlier point...or maybe I'm confused.

    I've heard of women that can orgasm without any physical contact whatsoever. I'll do my damnedest to hunt down a link, but trying to phrase the search criteria will be tricky.
    This sounds suspiciously like a male theory to take away any responsibility for sexually gratifying their woman...or perhaps I should quote:

    Alotta Fagina: "In Japan, the men come first, and the women come second."
    Austin Powers: "Or sometimes not at all..."
    (I'll use any excuse to quote Austin Powers)

    I'd be interested in that link...hell, maybe they give a seminar!!
    Last edited by K. Cannon; 06/06/2001 at 03:39 PM.
  17. #157  
    Oh, now this is conclusive.

    Here's my theory. Both spontaneous orgasms of the two women without sexual contact must have something to do with soul memories. In other words, they must have something to do with possible past life connections of the two parties concerned. The meeting, the encounter, triggered a soul memory of something they must have been doing in their past life meetings with each other. The present encounter brought back those sexual sensations up to the point of climax on the part of the women.
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  18. #158  
    Originally posted by K. Cannon
    This sounds suspiciously like a male theory to take away any responsibility for sexually gratifying their woman...or perhaps I should quote:
    hahaha
    I doubt it considering the prize men put on pleasing their woman. No, this was an actual article I read that described some women's ability to orgasm without physical contact. The search continues...
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  19. #159  
    Originally posted by linguas
    Actually, I didn't say this as a defense for porn,
    FWIW, I realized that. I was merely trying to clarify what my intent would have been had I posted it.


    but rather to illustrate that many men may just see porn as a carefree, no-strings-attached pleasure.
    Maybe too much is read into the fact that men enjoy porn - could it be that it isn't necessarily a substitute for a "real" relationship at all? (not now, honey, I just got the latest Penthouse! )
    I don't think that everyone uses porn as a subsitute for a real relationship. I'm sure that some people use it as a substitute for their own creativity.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  20. #160  
    Originally posted by Toby
    I don't think that everyone uses porn as a subsitute for a real relationship. I'm sure that some people use it as a substitute for their own creativity.
    Maybe men who need porn just don't have enough "soul memories."
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 LastLast

Posting Permissions