Poll about Legalized Prostitution
Chaos_Epoch wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
Chaos_Epoch wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
I think I'm actually more flexible in my beliefs than most people. It's just that I don't shy away from voicing the beliefs I do hold.
?
what you've written so far in this thread vs above.
Where is the actual contradiction there? Just because I hold feminist opinions at the moment doesn't mean I never change my opinions.
puddingmouse wrote:
Okay then. It's my experience that women aren't sexually dysfunctional. I could have no-strings sex with a woman quite easily if I wanted to (and I have done in the past).
PM me for my phone number, I am definitely interested.
puddingmouse wrote:
I also don't see sex as a fundamental need because I've gone years without having it. I think we're socialised to see ourselves as not complete without it.
There are differences between men and women, and counselling men upon their needs from a woman's point of view has its limitations, this necessity of sex being a case in point.
puddingmouse wrote:
The psychological benefits of having sex only really kick in when you have a partner, as well. I've had one night stands and they did nothing for me emotionally.
The benefits of having sex is getting a partner.
puddingmouse wrote:
If prostitution is doing anything it's satisfying ego (not really necessary because I believe ego is harmful) and satisfying physical sexual urges (which can be sorted out through masturbation).
After hundreds of tries, mistakes, sabotages and rejections, prostitution is the closest thing I have available to a loving relationship.
I don't thing being called a w*ker is the stuff of emotional wellbeing.
puddingmouse wrote:
I don't think there is anything indispensable about seeing a prostitute. I think it's something that people want to do, not need to do. I wouldn't mind if people just admitted it was a preference, rather than some kind of human right.
I don't recall anybody declaring sex or prostitution as a human right. And you make a fair point.
If it were in your control, would you rather see men who found themselves without partners and incapable of withstanding the as good as endless rejections and scorn of the women they have volunteered themselves for, condemned to a life without any physical intimacy with the opposite sex?
Last edited by ripped on 04 Feb 2013, 9:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
puddingmouse wrote:
Chaos_Epoch wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
Chaos_Epoch wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
I think I'm actually more flexible in my beliefs than most people. It's just that I don't shy away from voicing the beliefs I do hold.
?
what you've written so far in this thread vs above.
Where is the actual contradiction there? Just because I hold feminist opinions at the moment doesn't mean I never change my opinions.
feminist opinions have nothing to do with this. you don't appear to compromise on any given point or register any logic that doesn't adhere to your own by simply blowing it off at the earliest convenience.
oh see now you're wrong because my opinion > your opinion.
now I'm going to get drunk off my Merlot and haters gonna hate.
Chaos_Epoch wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
Chaos_Epoch wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
Chaos_Epoch wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
I think I'm actually more flexible in my beliefs than most people. It's just that I don't shy away from voicing the beliefs I do hold.
?
what you've written so far in this thread vs above.
Where is the actual contradiction there? Just because I hold feminist opinions at the moment doesn't mean I never change my opinions.
feminist opinions have nothing to do with this. you don't appear to compromise on any given point or register any logic that doesn't adhere to your own by simply blowing it off at the earliest convenience.
oh see now you're wrong because my opinion > your opinion.
now I'm going to get drunk off my Merlot and haters gonna hate.
I thought he was a misogynist (with reason) and I've had too many bad experiences talking to such people. That's not my usual method of argumentation. It's like a black person not wanting to talk to a racist - a justifiable attempt at preserving one's own sanity.
ripped wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
Okay then. It's my experience that women aren't sexually dysfunctional. I could have no-strings sex with a woman quite easily if I wanted to (and I have done in the past).
PM me for my phone number, I am definitely interested.
puddingmouse wrote:
I also don't see sex as a fundamental need because I've gone years without having it. I think we're socialised to see ourselves as not complete without it.
There are differences between men and women, and counselling men upon their needs from a woman's point of view has its limitations, this necessity of sex being a case in point.
puddingmouse wrote:
The psychological benefits of having sex only really kick in when you have a partner, as well. I've had one night stands and they did nothing for me emotionally.
The benefits of having sex is getting a partner.
puddingmouse wrote:
If prostitution is doing anything it's satisfying ego (not really necessary because I believe ego is harmful) and satisfying physical sexual urges (which can be sorted out through masturbation).
After hundreds of tries, mistakes, sabotages and rejections, prostitution is the closest thing I have available to a loving relationship.
I don't thing being called a w*ker is the stuff of emotional wellbeing.
puddingmouse wrote:
I don't think there is anything indispensable about seeing a prostitute. I think it's something that people want to do, not need to do. I wouldn't mind if people just admitted it was a preference, rather than some kind of human right.
I don't recall anybody declaring sex or prostitution as a human right. And you make a fair point.
If it were in your control, would you rather see men who found themselves without partners and incapable of withstanding the as good as endless rejections and scorn of the women they have volunteered themselves for, condemned to a life without any physical intimacy with the opposite sex?
Women are not that hard to get, seriously. If you have an attitude that they 'have' something you want - supply and demand - then they're going to be insulted and not really want to have sex with you. If you have the attitude that it's a mutual experience and make their pleasure a priority, you get laid more. There's a forum member here called Vigilans who could tell you about this.
Also, why do you think men 'need' sex? What proof do you have? Remember, I don't have to prove my point here because I'm not the one making the assertion - the burden of proof is on you.
Really would anyone still call you a w*ker for w*king? Whilst it would technically be true, pretty much everyone masturbates anyway, so I can't see any adult actually using that word literally as an insult. Plus, how would they know?
As for the 'human right' thing, I've seen it argued by some aspie males who use prostitutes that it is a human right to have sex. Sorry, I shouldn't have just assumed that this was also your position.
puddingmouse wrote:
Women are not that hard to get, seriously.
Walk a mile in my shoes dear.
puddingmouse wrote:
If you have an attitude that they 'have' something you want - supply and demand - then they're going to be insulted and not really want to have sex with you. If you have the attitude that it's a mutual experience and make their pleasure a priority, you get laid more. There's a forum member here called Vigilans who could tell you about this.
I am really no longer at the point where I can put it on the line just to get shot down yet again, insulted, abused, reported to the police ( yes, this happened for no more than putting my arm around a woman whom the previous week gave me a hug!).
puddingmouse wrote:
Also, why do you think men 'need' sex? What proof do you have? Remember, I don't have to prove my point here because I'm not the one making the assertion - the burden of proof is on you.
I am a man, and I need sex to make me feel human. Every male friend I have who has had sex has the same opinion. What by way of 'proof' do you ask for?
puddingmouse wrote:
Really would anyone still call you a w*ker for w*king? Whilst it would technically be true, pretty much everyone masturbates anyway, so I can't see any adult actually using that word literally as an insult. Plus, how would they know?
Who cares, its abuse and around here it's normal abuse.
Last edited by ripped on 04 Feb 2013, 9:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
puddingmouse wrote:
I thought he was a misogynist (with reason) and I've had too many bad experiences talking to such people. That's not my usual method of argumentation. It's like a black person not wanting to talk to a racist - a justifiable attempt at preserving one's own sanity.
so you finally admit to talking down to him and avoiding his questions instead? I've had many a trollfight/flamewar and have always ended up winning by using logical debate. don't lower yourself because "I've had too many bad experiences talking to such people."
ripped wrote:
I am a man, and I need sex to make me feel human. Every male friend I have who has had sex has the same opinion. What by way of 'proof' do you ask for?
Something that proves men's wellbeing depends on ejaculating into a bodily orifice rather than into a tissue (or a sock, if you want to gross).
I'd like to see a scientific paper that proves men need sex on a physiological level and not just that they need to simply ejaculate (which men do need to do, but that can be done solo).
Last edited by puddingmouse on 02 Feb 2013, 11:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Chaos_Epoch wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
I thought he was a misogynist (with reason) and I've had too many bad experiences talking to such people. That's not my usual method of argumentation. It's like a black person not wanting to talk to a racist - a justifiable attempt at preserving one's own sanity.
so you finally admit to talking down to him and avoiding his questions instead? I've had many a trollfight/flamewar and have always ended up winning by using logical debate. don't lower yourself because "I've had too many bad experiences talking to such people."
I really have, though. I'm actually traumatised by some of my experiences with misogynists.
I don't think I was talking down to him any more than he was to women as a whole (especially the bit where he said that we were seuxally dysfuctional)...but you're right, I did lower myself. I probably should've just stopped posting.
puddingmouse wrote:
Chaos_Epoch wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
I thought he was a misogynist (with reason) and I've had too many bad experiences talking to such people. That's not my usual method of argumentation. It's like a black person not wanting to talk to a racist - a justifiable attempt at preserving one's own sanity.
so you finally admit to talking down to him and avoiding his questions instead? I've had many a trollfight/flamewar and have always ended up winning by using logical debate. don't lower yourself because "I've had too many bad experiences talking to such people."
I really have, though. I'm actually traumatised by some of my experiences with misogynists.
I don't think I was talking down to him any more than he was to women as a whole (especially the bit where he said that we were seuxally dysfuctional)...but you're right, I did lower myself. I probably should've just stopped posting.
one of the best things to do.
puddingmouse wrote:
ripped wrote:
I am a man, and I need sex to make me feel human. Every male friend I have who has had sex has the same opinion. What by way of 'proof' do you ask for?
Something that proves men's wellbeing depends on ejaculating into a bodily orifice rather than into a tissue (or a sock, if you want to gross).
I'd like to see a scientific paper that proves men need sex on a physiological level and not just that they need to simply ejaculate (which men do need to do, but can be done solo).
You degrade the entire act of coitus as merely a male ejaculation. Let me tell you the two are different.
Your language is beginning to sound derogatory.
Last edited by ripped on 04 Feb 2013, 9:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
puddingmouse wrote:
Women are not that hard to get, seriously.
...
Try getting one as an Asper. It's bloody f*****g hard.
Last edited by Shau on 03 Feb 2013, 12:03 am, edited 1 time in total.
ripped wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
ripped wrote:
I am a man, and I need sex to make me feel human. Every male friend I have who has had sex has the same opinion. What by way of 'proof' do you ask for?
Something that proves men's wellbeing depends on ejaculating into a bodily orifice rather than into a tissue (or a sock, if you want to gross).
I'd like to see a scientific paper that proves men need sex on a physiological level and not just that they need to simply ejaculate (which men do need to do, but can be done solo).
You degrade the entire act of coitus as merely a male ejaculation. Let me tell you the two are different.
Your language is beginning to sound derogatory.
It what sense am I being derogatory?
I know sex isn't male ejaculation. I'm mostly a lesbian, so I know that very well.
I was just saying that men need only to ejaculate from a health POV, to prevent prostate cancer and to release endorphins. I wasn't equating sex with male ejaculation.
I'd just like to see some evidence that being stimulated by another person is needed, not wanted.
