Who was more f**ked up? - Page 4

strandinthewind · #46 10-14-2005, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GateandGarden

So, if someone says that he or she has simply never had a sex drive, one is to say that he or she is abnormal? Sorry but I don't want to say that because it sounds judgmental to me.

Biology is never judgemental.

I think you are coming at it from a personal and not biological perspective. it is abnormal from a biological perspective just as not being able to see, hear, walk, talk, etc. is abnormal. We are hard wired to be able to do those things.

From a personal or subjective state. Yes, it would be judgemental (good or bad) to assume this person's biological abnormality (if that is what is going on here) is not up to my standards.

It is two separate thoughts.

estranged4life · #47 10-14-2005, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dissention

They always back up when I unzip because they just aren't sure how big it's going to get and like to be next to the nearest exit.

they call me "tripod"!!!

strandinthewind · #48 10-14-2005, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lagringader&r

I changed my wording in the original post. I didn't change it for Lux or for anybody else that decided to flame me. To me, f**ked up is a general way of saying something isn't right. I am not always as good as some peeps with how I word things. So I changed it.

I did not take offense at it and realized you were speaking in the vernacular. But, others did for whatever reason and it was cool of you to change it.

strandinthewind · #49 10-14-2005, 07:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dissention

They always back up when I unzip because they just aren't sure how big it's going to get and like to be next to the nearest exit.

and that's just the unraveling of your pubic hair - sort of like a jack in the box with a large afro

Zip and then SURPRISE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

lagringader&r · #50 10-14-2005, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Biology is never judgemental.

I think you are coming at it from a personal and not biological perspective. it is abnormal from a biological perspective just as not being able to see, hear, walk, talk, etc. is abnormal. We are hard wired to be able to do those things.

From a personal or subjective state. Yes, it would be judgemental (good or bad) to assume this person's biological abnormality (if that is what is going on here) is not up to my standards.

It is two separate thoughts.

I agree. We are born to want certain things and sex is one of them. It's not just with us. It's with animals too. It's instinct. So if she was attracted enough to *heavy pet* with the dude and she only freaked out when he took it out, what does that mean? If I was turned off to a guy, I wouldn't let him feel me at all. So that's where the question comes in about being afraid of a sexual organ or a sexual act. See how careful I am now with my wording? But let's get back to the subjects of snowballing later.

I hate hypocrites.

Serrart · #51 10-14-2005, 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lagringader&r

I agree. We are born to want certain things and sex is one of them. It's not just with us. It's with animals too. It's instinct. So if she was attracted enough to *heavy pet* with the dude and she only freaked out when he took it out, what does that mean?

I think it simply means that sexual life for everyone is a very personal universe that melt fears, dreams, happiness, mournings, expectations and disappointments, in an unique and quite uncomprehensible way.

Romy

lagringader&r · #52 10-14-2005, 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lux

Why must you get in an extra one and continue to dismiss how offended I and others were? I was not being hypocritical, I was hurt and tried to express to you the offense taken, there was no harsh language until my offense was continually dismissed. Do not continue to call me a hypocrite.

Last post to you on this thread. I'll stop calling you a hypocrite when you stop saying **** you to me and calling me a judging person. You were judging me for something I wasn't doing if you bothered to read the other posts at all. You were judging me for judging which I wasn't doing. That's a hypocrite. If you have a problem with something somebody posted, why don't you try to be a little cooler about it and not say **** you. THAT is offensive. Deal?

GateandGarden · #53 10-14-2005, 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dissention

That's not true.

I know. I was saying it as an example of something that some members of the right use to justify condemnation of homosexuality.

dissention · #54 10-14-2005, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GateandGarden

I know. I was saying it as an example of something that some members of the right use to justify condemnation of homosexuality.

But why? We're not talking about the right and I was under the assumption that we were discussing Jason's comment that human beings are wired to be sexual beings and that those who aren't are abnormal from that standpoint. It has really nothing to do with homosexuality or heterosexuality, or politics; it's about sexuality.

GateandGarden · #55 10-14-2005, 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Biology is never judgemental.

I think you are coming at it from a personal and not biological perspective. it is abnormal from a biological perspective just as not being able to see, hear, walk, talk, etc. is abnormal. We are hard wired to be able to do those things.

From a personal or subjective state. Yes, it would be judgemental (good or bad) to assume this person's biological abnormality (if that is what is going on here) is not up to my standards.

It is two separate thoughts.

Okay, I understand your distinction.

Whether or not the issue is so personal for me is uncertain. I don't consider myself asexual, but I suppose the parallel between the ignorance that surrounds asexuality and the ignorance that surrounds homosexuality made it personal enough.

Still, since biology (like all sciences except physics, I believe) is ever-changing, I think it's possible that we could discover that human beings can have a natural disinclination towards sex.

GateandGarden · #56 10-14-2005, 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dissention

But why? We're not talking about the right and I was under the assumption that we were discussing Jason's comment that human beings are wired to be sexual beings and that those who aren't are abnormal from that standpoint. It has really nothing to do with homosexuality or heterosexuality, or politics; it's about sexuality.

In some of my comments, I was looking at it from a social standpoint as well.

GateandGarden · #57 10-14-2005, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lagringader&r

Last post to you on this thread. I'll stop calling you a hypocrite when you stop saying **** you to me and calling me a judging person. You were judging me for something I wasn't doing if you bothered to read the other posts at all. You were judging me for judging which I wasn't doing. That's a hypocrite. If you have a problem with something somebody posted, why don't you try to be a little cooler about it and not say **** you. THAT is offensive. Deal?

But you used the f-word liberally as well, in reference to a person, and also in reference to many other people like her, inevitably.

strandinthewind · #58 10-14-2005, 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GateandGarden

In some of my comments, I was looking at it from a social standpoint as well.

and, not that you need me or anyone else to validate your feelings, there is nothing wrong with that and we all do it.

I was just noting that the fact that we have glands and hormones means we are built to want to use our sex organs. How or how often we use them is where the ridiculous ignorance you are talking about comes into play. I mean I am into NM (Neiman Marcus) not S&M and cannot really fathom the whole put me in a locked cage in the basement until you get home work and then beat the hell out of me until dawn so I can ejaculate and enjoy it sect out there (and I know people who do this mind you) - but for me to say "that is sick" or "that is unnatural" is wrong in the sense that what I like sexually (from tickeling my knees to whatever) is open for that same judgement. So, it is IMO and though it is hard for most if not all, best not judge consenual behavior, which is I think what you are talking about in part.

I mean if someone waits until they are 45 before ever touching another person, who am I to tell them that is wrong or abormal if they have all of their biological parts in tact and are truly just not interested. Just because we have a sex drive (maybe manifested only in yearing or dreams) does not mean we are under an obligation from a social perspective to use it.

GateandGarden · #59 10-14-2005, 08:20 PM

I understand now, Jason. Thanks for explaining.

irishgrl · #60 10-14-2005, 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I think it is, solely from a biological perspective, abnormal to be afraid of sex. We are built to yearn for it not freak out at that sight of a penis. So, from that point of view, if your friend really totally freaked out during heavy petting she could have a deep rooted mental and/or biological problem like intercourse is painful as Mary mentioned, she was assaulted, her hormones are not functioning properly, etc. I mean many men are terrified of sex if their foreskin is too tight to slide off of their glans and eschew all sex until it is corrected.

I dont know if we are exactly built to "yearn" for it, but we sure as heck are curious about it....and for someone to react the way that friend did is indicative (to ME anyway) that there is an underlying issue of SOME sort. Either abuse or a bad experience of some kind (which could have been consentual but went bad for some reason?) At any rate, there is a documented phenomenon where some women experience a clamping down of the muscles of the vaginal wall that creates a very real pain if a man tries to penetrate. The only thing that helps with that is therapy and understanding (and lots of patience) on the partner's part. If your friend had a bad experience once or even several times, she may be reacting in a physical as well as mental/emotional manner.

Understand, I dont know if this is the cause, but if it is even part of the problem, then she will definitely need to see a sex therapist if she WANTS to have sex. Ultimately, this whole topic turns on whether your friend is actually bothered by her reaction or not--in other words, does she WANT to have sex and find that she cant? If so, she should see a sex therapist.

If on the other hand, she is just not turned on by sex, then I dont know what to say about that...I have no frame of reference for that, and no training and Im not about to make a guess.