# Having self-respect & dignity in dating.



## theflame (Apr 12, 2014)

I believe in having standards, self-respect and dignity. If you don't respect yourself, don't expect anyone else to. And I don't need to go to church to think these things -- one should already have these values, that's if you know your worth.


----------



## theflame (Apr 12, 2014)

Why would I want someone who my sister, friend and cousin has banged just because it's in the past? And why would I want a guy who strips in a club where every other woman on the block can see his goodies and it's not special to me since the whole world can see it? Tell me again why this should be accepted? Because some women think this is empowering? More like degrading.


----------



## theflame (Apr 12, 2014)

I send pretty pics, but I don't have to show my boobies. And you never know what people could do with your pictures as well so I don't send pics, either way.



atamagasuita said:


> Yes. I value that too. But sometimes I'm fucking impulsive i send sexy pics xD just for fun. XD Because I'm a girl i guess. Lol. XD so i don't have self respect of myself in that case? Lol. Stupid. Joke. I have self respect to the point i know how to respect myself. XD


----------



## Cast (Dec 20, 2016)

theflame said:


> I believe in having standards, self-respect and dignity. If you don't respect yourself, don't expect anyone else to. And I don't need to go to church to think these things -- one should already have these values, that's if you know your worth.


So, if you (by someone else's standards) don't respect yourself, is it ok for random people to insult you based on your personal choices? I can have sex with a hundred man and still expect people to respect me, like, you know, every good human being who isn't hurting anyone should be respected.
For me, self-respect and self-worth could be just doing what makes me happy and not mind some stranger's judgment.


----------



## BearRun (Mar 3, 2017)

Rock Of Ages said:


> My obvious counter argument to yours is this: if it's acceptable for a girl to reject me because I listen to metal and voted for Trump, then why is it not acceptable for me to reject a girl because she's been in a gangbang?!?
> 
> Too few women seem to understand that it isn't what they feel in their hearts, but what they actually _do_ that will define them in the eyes of men. And actions have consequences.
> 
> (thus said the Fe user unto the Fi user, lol)


I don't recall someone telling you that you have to accept a girl regardless of her sexual history. Just don't expect girls to accept you regardless of how you treat/perceive them. Women are free to reject jerks. 

'Define them in the eyes of men' you are one man. You do not speak for all men. It's a game of musical chairs and some men and women might end up without a chair. You might do well to remember that what's in your heart and how you treat women will 'define you in the eyes of women.' Your actions have consequences too. Some men won't like women that sleep around, some women won't like men who are assholes.


----------



## theflame (Apr 12, 2014)

These types of women are stereotyped for a reason. And it's not a good thing to brag about whether you're a man or a woman who sleeps around for cash or not. It's ridiculous to attempt to convince people to have self respect and dignity -- people should want these things for themselves period, smh.


----------



## Tsubaki (Apr 14, 2015)

theflame said:


> Are there people like me left who still care about having some self-respect when it comes to sleeping around?


With this, you sound fairly insecure. It almost seems to me like you are sexually frustrated and are searching for a culprit. I am just thinking that if you did not hold a grudge against promiscuous people for some reason, why would you talk like this? I do not support the mindset of abstinence, but I would never go and say: "Are there people like me left who still accept their sexuality as a part of themselves and care about being self-confident, not submitting their sexuality to a man?"
Just the nature of this questions seems to me like you are insecure about your own mindset and seeking validation from other people.



> People are free to do as they please. Just don't expect someone decent to accept a promiscuous past.


This is very passive-aggressive, You are telling people that they can do what they want, but that they will 100% fail at achieving what they want. It still seems a bit like you are projecting and trying to tell yourself that you are achieving that goal with your way of thinking and others don't, because you have seen the opposite come true a lot of times, I assume. You are also telling us that anyone who has the same mindset as you is considered someone "decent"

Just my point of view on this:
Anyone who cares more about how many dicks I had between my legs than about my personality and skills is a disgusting asshole that can go fuck themselves. Period. You are glorifying a hate for promiscuity, even though with that, you are attributing a very shallow feature to "the perfect man". You are telling us about a fantasy prince, not about any actual man.



> Do people care about having self-respect and dignity anymore?


I have very high levels of self-respect and self-confidence and I also keep my dignity. Granted, my definition of dignity might be different than yours, but it is definitely there.



> With women posting half naked pics on Facebook/instagram as the norm and men enabling them...I wonder who still covers up and doesn't need to show their goods to get a man's attention?


Okay, some of those really annoy me as well, but just when they pretend that they are not doing it. Still, you sound like a prude who wants everyone to cover their whole bodies. The only thing that I can say about is that whatever you do, you need to be authentic and show what you are comfortable with showing. It's your body and your business and nobody should care about what anyone else wears.


----------



## Librarylady (Mar 11, 2017)

I don't like casual sex at all, period. It's also a major turn-off for me to date someone who is into that sort of thing. I am pretty conservative with sex.

On the other hand, I think resorting to name-calling when it comes to people who are more liberal about sex is uncalled for. I might not like it, but It's also not really my business. And if anything it helps weed out the incompatible ones in the dating pool since I wouldn't want someone to lie to me about not wanting something casual just because it isn't socially acceptable.

I also don't tolerate sexist double standards. I may be kind of prudish about people who sleep around, but I think even less of a person who judges women for it and not men. If you want to argue "self-respect", then men who sleep around are just as trashy. You could argue that women are the ones to get pregnant, but men are the ones who spread more STD's when they sleep around. As a lesbian, It's technically safer for me to only sleep with women who don't have any heterosexual experience (even if all of their lesbian experiences were casual) compared to the reverse. Just the mechanics of how things work.

(And I'm not trying to shame promiscuous men or anything, just saying that it goes both ways)

I sometimes do feel judged for not having any sexual experience or for wanting to be more conservative about sex. So why should I insult someone else.


----------



## theflame (Apr 12, 2014)

I wonder what these people think about people who wait until marriage to have sex if they think monogamous sex is "judgmental."


----------



## theflame (Apr 12, 2014)

If you'll read my previous comments and even in my OP I said I don't date men who sleep around, smh. I didn't just judge women for it. I think I specifically stated in my OP I see what a person is like in their views on sex and commitment, doesn't matter if it's a guy or a girl.



Aspiringwriter said:


> I don't like casual sex at all, period. It's also a major turn-off for me to date someone who is into that sort of thing. I am pretty conservative with sex.
> 
> On the other hand, I think resorting to name-calling when it comes to people who are more liberal about sex is uncalled for. I might not like it, but It's also not really my business. And if anything it helps weed out the incompatible ones in the dating pool since I wouldn't want someone to lie to me about not wanting something casual just because it isn't socially acceptable.
> 
> ...


----------



## shameless (Apr 21, 2014)

theflame said:


> I wonder what these people think about people who wait until marriage to have sex if they think monogamous sex is "judgmental."


I do not care what the hell you do!


----------



## changos (Nov 21, 2011)

theflame said:


> Having self-respect & dignity in dating.


Respect others, get some respect. The dating world has become a cheap market of used good, where each one is trying to get the best deal (while unfair in general), that's what I think is the general scenario, and having self respect there, means to me the freedom to walk away leaving the jerk-person on their own, it's fair and many times it's earned.

But somehow I can't directly relate the title to the post. Will bold instead of quoting.

*people don't care about having any self-respect and dignity any more since the world needs to become accepting of everything nowadays -- even promiscuous people*. I 100% agree on this on a dating basis, I'm not even taking this to having sex, and yes I agree a lot of people who have done stupid stuff in the past have somehow succeeded on putting the world on it's knees: today everyone tries to "accept and respect" whatever people did and do, because for some strange reasons, saying "what you did is not ok" turns into you having problems, not tolerating other people and unable to accept people? that's childish spoiled behavior.

*Are there people like me left who still care about having some self-respect when it comes to sleeping around?* I believe in this (specially the title) but the post is turning into sex, I don't know why, self respect begins at the table while having dinner, answering a text message, a mail, etc.

* I don't mind casual sex -- as long as it's monogamous. *Agree, but sounds tricky to me.

* I only need sex from one person...not many different people-. *Agree. But again, its sounding as turning the topic into "a relationship", dating is dating.

* A couple of things I look for in someone is how a person views sex and commitment. *I would say I agree, but I don't. Now in the middle of the post, yes now it sounds to me as older people walking into RadioShack and asking questions as if the TV is going to work fine for 50 years, if it gets good signal (where??) if they can watch their favorite show (do you have cable???) etc. Commitment is something that has and doesn't have to do with sex, the thing begins to sound tricky to me.

* People are free to do as they please. Just don't expect someone decent to accept a promiscuous past. *Agree, but not exclusively. I have dated women who were into church, lots of people respecting them, etc and had no promiscuous past, but hey, meeting one of their ex BF sure meant a good bye, pretty questionable stuff. The following will sound terrible but morals do not always have 100% to do with sex or promiscuity. Some people have multiple sex partners but don't lie, don't steal, etc.

* Do people care about having self-respect and dignity anymore? *I do.

* With women posting half naked pics on Facebook/instagram as the norm and men enabling them...I wonder who still covers up and doesn't need to show their goods to get a man's attention?. *Sounds flawed to me. If it was the opposite situation I wouldn't mention women "enabling it", I would only say "stupid people posting half named pics and then expecting respect/rings".




*My view in general. *You say you are ok with casual sex as long as it's monogamous. OK!, then what I we have a date and we have casual sex on Jan1. How much time should go by without sex until I think it is or not monogamous, what if two months later (without having sex with you) I find someone special and she asks me to have sex, should I say "no I can't, two months ago I had sex and thus I'm exclusive to her, or no I don't see her anymore but then you would think I'm promiscuous". Ok, what if it wasn't you the first place, but the second? would that change your view?

What is dating in the first place? I'm latin, so in spanish we have diff words (and two-words or more) to refer to dating levels or chapters, USA mostly uses the same word for everything. So if I ask you out today, what if a good friend of mine wants to have sex with me tomorrow? should I say "no! I'm with someone" and then we just don't hang out anymore? (I mean you). 


I have walked into "dates" and get the feeling she wants me to stop doing things and be exclusive to her. My immediate reaction is walking out (even if I'm not having sex with anyone). Why? nobody can ask exclusivity from a stranger, first you get to know the person, that's where respect and self respect begins. I see this situation as a opportunistic critic with the same average goal: asking a lot from someone who you just meet. That's not fair, it's not respectful. The sad result in this context is, refusing to give in causes the other party to think negative stuff.

So, etc exclusivity, -eh? what?- oh so you are promiscuous!! 
so, etc commitment, -eh? I just met you- oh so you fear commitment


Agreements and contracts take time.


----------



## theflame (Apr 12, 2014)

Stated specifically in my OP "With women posting half naked pics on Facebook/instagram as the norm and men enabling them...I wonder who still covers up and doesn't need to show their goods to get a man's attention?"

Not sure where ya get off thinking I think things only of women. I also look down upon men who enable these women.


----------



## Cast (Dec 20, 2016)

Rock Of Ages said:


> My obvious counter argument to yours is this: if it's acceptable for a girl to reject me because I listen to metal and voted for Trump, then why is it not acceptable for me to reject a girl because she's been in a gangbang?!?


Oh, you're free to set whatever standards you like. You could be rejecting a woman because she has only two eyes instead of the three eyes you desire, and that would be completely accetable.
I think the issue isn't that you'd reject a woman for her sexual experience. It's more the fact that you go around calling women _sluts_ and _whores_, and, well, people don't like being insulted by a random guy on the internet. Weird, right?

**


@theflame
You say it's degrading to have sex with multiple partners, or sex with someone who had multiple partners - because that would be not special to you. But previously you said that casual sex with a single partner is ok.
What's special to you about fucking a guy just to relieve your sexual urges? That's what dogs do*. _In-and-out in-and-out in-and-out oh shit I finished - that was good, bye. I'll call you when I need a hole to relieve my sexual urges again._ Talking about degradation...

Here is my personal definition of dignified, respectful sex:
-truly consensual. No external pressure, no excessive alcohol, no drugs.
-safe. Protected against both STIs and unwanted pregnancy.
-no one is being used as a mean to sexual relief. If you need an orgasm, there are a lot of options - from your hand to an inflatable doll to a dildo - that don't require you to basically see another person as a hole/piece of meat. For me, sex is mostly about emotional connection, sharing a deep experience, and finding pleasure in pleasuring my partner. Otherwise I'm just masturbating myself using another human being.

A few more points of dignity and self-respect are:
-treating my partner in the same respectful way I expect to be treated.
-not judging some random stranger for having different standards.
-having an internal sense of self-worth that doesn't depend on how others might judge me for my sexual preferences.


*no, having casual sex doesn't make anyone a dog. I was just trying to judge others for their sexual activities. Ew, that felt really bad and totally went against my sense of respect.


----------



## changos (Nov 21, 2011)

I will try to explain the core of my view in general terms: when you meet someone new and agree on having a drink, is that a date?? you are not on a date, you are exploring. Anyway that's not the center of my idea. *When you meet someone you like, despite you wanting to have a date, you don't know if the other person is in the middle of something with someone else*. The other person might be in the 10% of something, or 90% of something, you just don't know, so you don't suppose to ask, demand or request; you can propose, explore or ask (ask as in making questions). It actually means when you meet someone you don't just qualify to "favorite/exclusiveness" right away, you might even have to way (there is a lane of people perhaps). 


Nobody in their right mind will risk the investment (emotional, psychological etc) with other people, by meeting a new one that you know nothing about, and agreeing on stopping your life, sex, going out etc for this new person. That's something very young people do, and even perhaps isolate from friends or possible partners giving exclusivity to the new stranger. I'm just expressing my view: *when you meet someone and start going out, 1 month??? hell!! you are not even friends, you both are strangers despite whatever both of you feel. So walk carefully and don't demand out of your limits *(I don't). Even if you have casual sex there, you didn't have sex with a friends, with a 30% partner/BF, you had sex with an stranger. Not yelling not feeling threatened etc, just making this clear because it seems like a global idea that when you go out with someone they own you.


I'm a man, straight, and if I meet a woman and ask her for a drink, dinner, etc, *I do not expect her to agree or to engage on anything*. I'm giving myself a chance and giving her a chance, she might just had sex the night before, she might have something at 30% with someone and who am I to ask? to request? I'm a nobody, a stranger. Things will evolve, and without being BF and GF we both will have a say as we walk together. Surprisingly that's one of the reasons many instead, refuse to have sex in early stages, because it can be a red flag on people then requesting exclusivity trying to turn the "date" into a relationship. It's easy to explain but it's easier to feel tricked when you are there.


----------



## theflame (Apr 12, 2014)

Question: for those who think people are "judgmental" who don't accept promiscuous sex, aren't you a hypocrite? You don't like when people call you names but you call church people and people who do not sleep around prudish and close-minded. Why should people accept your views when you aren't accepting of others?

If I was with a person for a long time and they told me they would never be fulfilled with just one person, they are wasting my time.
What do you think it's like to date a person who will eventually say they want a threesome and they knew that's what I would never want? I don't have to accept it. You can find someone who will.


----------



## Mange (Jan 9, 2011)

theflame said:


> Question: for those who think people are "judgmental" who don't accept promiscuous sex, aren't you a hypocrite? You don't like when people call you names but you call church people and people who do not sleep around prudish and close-minded. Why should people accept your views when you aren't accepting of others?
> 
> If I was with a person for a long time and they told me they would never be fulfilled with just one person, they are wasting my time.
> What do you think it's like to date a person who will eventually say they want a threesome and they knew that's what I would never want? I don't have to accept it. You can find someone who will.


nobody said if you dont have promiscuous sex you're judgmental? Where the hell are you getting this from? this is why you're supposed to tag and quote people. we're responding to you directly and you're just over here shouting into an empty room. tag someone and address their argument if you want to keep this conversation going.


----------



## Cast (Dec 20, 2016)

theflame said:


> Question: for those who think people are "judgmental" who don't accept promiscuous sex, aren't you a hypocrite? You don't like when people call you names but you call church people and people who do not sleep around prudish and close-minded. Why should people accept your views when you aren't accepting of others?
> 
> If I was with a person for a long time and they told me they would never be fulfilled with just one person, they are wasting my time.
> What do you think it's like to date a person who will eventually say they want a threesome and they knew that's what I would never want? I don't have to accept it. You can find someone who will.


You're not called judgmental because you personally don't accept promiscuous sex experienced by yourself or your partner. What's judgmental is *the self-righteous way you phrase it and the expectation everyone should adhere to your sexual standards*.
I'm not judgmental when I say I don't accept casual sex. I'm judgmental when I say people who have casual sex are like dogs.
You said:
-*people don't care about having any self-respect and dignity any more*
-*People are free to do as they please. Just don't expect someone decent to accept a promiscuous past.*
-*Do people care about having self-respect and dignity anymore?*
-*I wonder who still covers up and doesn't need to show their goods to get a man's attention?*
-*I believe in having standards, self-respect and dignity.*
-*If you don't respect yourself, don't expect anyone else to.*
-*one should already have these values, that's if you know your worth.*

And yeah, maybe it's a bit judgmental to say that a person having sex with different partners has no self-respect and dignity, is not decent like you, needs to cover up, has no standards, should expect (aka deserves?) no respect from others, has no self-worth...


----------



## Handsome Dyke (Oct 4, 2012)

theflame said:


> It seems that since sex has become easier to find, people don't care about having any self-respect and dignity any more since the world needs to become accepting of everything nowadays -- even promiscuous people.
> 
> Are there people like me left who still care about having some self-respect when it comes to sleeping around?


You are confusing *your* standards of self-respect and dignity with other people's standards.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

theflame said:


> Question: for those who think people are "judgmental" who don't accept promiscuous sex, aren't you a hypocrite? You don't like when people call you names but you call church people and people who do not sleep around prudish and close-minded. Why should people accept your views when you aren't accepting of others?
> 
> If I was with a person for a long time and they told me they would never be fulfilled with just one person, they are wasting my time.
> What do you think it's like to date a person who will eventually say they want a threesome and they knew that's what I would never want? I don't have to accept it. You can find someone who will.


I don't think anyone here is telling you you have to have a threesome. It sounds like the guy you were with was incompatible with your values and life goals, and that you didn't find that out until later. I am sorry that happened to you, it unfortunately happens to a lot of people, men and women, and that's one reason why dating can be very frustrating.

But I don't think the problem here is his sexual choices--just perhaps that he didn't make it clear to you before hand. And ultimately, you ended up having to give something up that was meaningful to you, and which you spent a lot of time on. Maybe you also felt pressured by conflicting values--valuing the relationship with him and not wanting to give up on it, and also valuing your own boundaries and choices regarding sex and your appearance.

There is nothing wrong with wanting to have a monogamous relationship, but there is a difference between having that preference, and preferring not to have casual sex, and calling people names and being intolerant, and accusing them of lacking self-respect because they have a different preference.

There are people who will pressure you or insult you for not being 'slutty' enough (for lack of a better word), or being too 'slutty.' But it's your choice how you want to dress, who you want to have sex with, and who you want to be in a relationship with, and what kind of relationship and boundaries you have in that relationship. 

I think it's disrespectful to expect or pressure someone into doing something they don't feel comfortable with--whether it is covering up or taking off clothes. Sounds like maybe he wasn't very respectful of that or else that he just didn't know what he wanted, or something else. But sounds like you weren't compatible.

I don't want to have promiscuous sex, which I already stated--I don't think that's judgmental because I am directing my judgment at my own life and myself. 

I think the only reason people might view your behavior as judgmental is because you are calling people names and accusing them of having no self-respect, rather than just expressing a preference for no casual sex, and for a partner who fits whatever your description of 'decent' person. Sure, we all vent and get frustrated, and certainly there is no shortage of people frustrated by dating or sex, but I think people are commenting on that behavior--not on your preferences.

I've bitched about sluttiness and prudity. I bitch about everything though in some moods--it's still good to consider when you may be misplacing anger or judgments.

If someone sexually pressured you to do things you didn't feel comfortable with, that is not okay. But that is a different behavior than simply choosing to have casual sex with other consenting adults.


----------



## theflame (Apr 12, 2014)

No one needs to accept anything they don't want to accept. If you don't accept that people like monogamous sex better than promiscuous sex, someone doesn't have to accept your promiscuous past. It goes both ways.


----------



## Cast (Dec 20, 2016)

@theflame who exactly are you replying to now? I'm getting a bit confused.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

theflame said:


> With women posting half naked pics on Facebook/instagram as the norm and men enabling them...I wonder who still covers up and doesn't need to show their goods to get a man's attention?


I'd imagine a lot of women. Do they have a decent face? Know how to do their hair and make-up? Bright eyes? Genuine smile? Can they be charming? Make a dude laugh ( ...without threatening him? lol).

And. Does this mean just sex is off the table? Guys eat the innocent, clean, lady-like, eyelash batting stuff up. lol. I've joked that the more "slutty" I've come across in the past the more likely I've probably been to be entertaining something real. It's more about my selection process, and portraying myself as an individual, free person (though open to pairing off), gauging reactions to that ...and less about manipulating him by creating some fantasy where he's big and strong and I'm virginal and sweet. Fantasies are fun and games if they remain just that. Probably not the best way to actually get to know someone though. I've gone so far as to wear all white and soft materials (cleavage was rare) and what not around guys when I was younger... and I'd be dating several at once.

There was this one dude I was considering something casual with (somewhat recently), and he was treating it like a freaking contract. We go out for drinks, and I didn't even wear a bra - boobs all out. I had crucifix earrings in too, which was totally a subconscious choice, but looking back it was like, what - was I trying to keep Satan away? :laughing: "I could be a whore, and you could be Satan... if it's all out on the table and we're being (too?) honest about this." I had one of the most real conversations about casual sex I've ever had that night. We didn't get it on either. I think some fantasy is probably necessary for the sake of attraction, on all ends. Maybe.

Um. So appearances can be deceiving and sex and love are risk regardless?


----------



## changos (Nov 21, 2011)

theflame said:


> Question: for those who think people are "judgmental" who don't accept promiscuous sex, *#1aren't you a hypocrite?* You don't like when people call you names but you call church people and people who do not sleep around prudish and close-minded. *#2 Why should people accept your views when you aren't accepting of others*?
> 
> If I was with a person for a long time and they told me they would never be fulfilled with just one person, they are wasting my time.
> What do you think it's like to date a person who will eventually say they want a threesome and they knew that's what I would never want? I don't have to accept it. * #3 You can find someone* who will.


In the major extent I find very easy to agree with you, but I'm having trouble following a straight line on the concepts.

#1. In my case in that sense, I can easily find people to be (1) illogical, (2) contradictory, (3) unfair and (4) hypocrite. That's how it works to me, why? because narcissistic people aside, I've found many are unable to understand what they ask is not even related to what they give, or that they ask way too much. In short: illogical or contradictory but with no harm intended. Unfair and hypocrite in my world? it not only takes contradictory actions, it takes a intention too. Example: I can find people who I think they contradict themselves on their posts, but I don't think they are hypocrites, that's too heave of a word to me.

#2. Again I agree with you, and I think the answer to "why" is: you don't have to. Dating involves choosing, negotiating and making a choice, you are as free to say not as the other person. What makes things complex is we all can be rejected due to million reasons (sex life aside), even by making too much noise while eating.

#3. That's the easy and evident answer, we all can find someone, it takes time yes, the older we get the more difficult is to find a blank page, but we all can seek and find.




theflame said:


> #4. *If I was with a person for a long time and they told me they would never be fulfilled with just one person, they are wasting my time.*
> 
> * #5 What do you think it's like to date a person who will eventually say they want a threesome and they knew that's what I would never want? I don't have to accept it. You can find someone who will.*


#4, yes I agree 5,000%. The problem is sometimes we don't ask the right questions, and others: people are not willing to say anything that is clear in the context of what we can deal with or don't. And wasting time hurts, specially when older and years of experience, feels like deceived. 

#5 I think I understand this part. Easy answer: terrible and time waster, deception. On the other hand some people do this to reject and terminate with someone who is difficult to talk to. I have 100s of stories and mine myself, I never wanted to do that, there was a woman (friend) who was mad at me because I cheated on her (I never did) and we were not even on a relationship (and to be honest she was and still is some kind of jerk). Anyway I cared, we tried to talk but she turned everything into a guilt trip for months, long story short: did I sleep with ABCDE? YES!!! and I will do it again. Did yo ever...? yes, yes to everything you can accuse me, just end up with this list of accusations. (Hope that I explained this the right way). I told her we were over as friends but she refused so I started saying yes to everything bad I supposedly did, even told her "did I" without even finishing the line: yes I did yes yes yes and yes. It sucks and I'm willing to talk but that's a total time waster.

I wont say "it seems like you..." but I can ask: can I? the descriptions sounds like you have been hurt badly with something that could have been avoided with sincerity and honesty. I understand what you describe but it sounds more as if you remain hurt or mad about something (and to me, that's not negative, we are humans, I would probably feel the same way, or not, who knows).


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

BearRun said:


> I don't recall someone telling you that you have to accept a girl regardless of her sexual history. Just don't expect girls to accept you regardless of how you treat/perceive them. Women are free to reject jerks.


Well that's kind of obvious. I am very purposeful in my presentation as I want to screen out certain types of women. Like I said to another girl back there, she'd be doing me a favour by rejecting me.



BearRun said:


> 'Define them in the eyes of men' you are one man. You do not speak for all men. It's a game of musical chairs and some men and women might end up without a chair. You might do well to remember that what's in your heart and how you treat women will 'define you in the eyes of women.' Your actions have consequences too. Some men won't like women that sleep around, some women won't like men who are assholes.


If you think I am an asshole, you clearly haven't met many men.

I am just very direct about what I like and don't like, which seems to be too much for a lot of people.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

changos said:


> So if I ask you out today, what if a good friend of mine wants to have sex with me tomorrow? should I say "no! I'm with someone" and then we just don't hang out anymore? (I mean you).


How much of a connection did you make? How interested are you in her? How possible do you think a future is? You could hurt the falling process (you know, so like, feelings) if you interrupt it with another woman. Though of course, then the sex would likely be more than "casual" on some level. (Even if you aren't officially "with" the person).

Some people still see the world as a romantic place and will wait for people without promises. Especially if dates are already in place.


----------



## Cast (Dec 20, 2016)

Rock Of Ages said:


> Well that's kind of obvious. I am very purposeful in my presentation as I want to screen out certain types of women. Like I said to another girl back there, she'd be doing me a favour by rejecting me.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Maybe you could avoid insults like _slut_ and _whore_ while still being very direct. I think it would really help people to focus on the point you're making, rather then feel offended for your offensive wording.
I find your posts really interesting, but at the end, what sticks is the insults you poured everywhere.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

Rock Of Ages said:


> I am just very direct about what I like and don't like, which seems to be too much for a lot of people.


No, you present it like it's objective "market value" and act all "don't shoot the messenger!" ...until you get called out on it, and then it's all just personal preference.

I'm still waiting for you to answer my questions about yours  

Bravery adds points to "market value" too. A lot of the guys who harp on about such things seem to be lacking it ironically from my observation.

I guess they see women as easy targets.


----------



## theflame (Apr 12, 2014)

Like I said to those who "disagree" with what I say -- very few women like me left. Women these days just wanna give out free sex without the man needing to work for it, smh.

The assholes are people who give up freely what should be sacred between two people.


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

Cast said:


> Maybe you could avoid insults like _slut_ and _whore_ while still being very direct. I think it would really help people to focus on the point you're making, rather then feel offended for your offensive wording.
> I find your posts really interesting, but at the end, what sticks is the insults you poured everywhere.


Thank you for the compliment. I just can't help but notice that these women (by and large) have no sense of humour whatsoever. Being an irreverent slut-shamer is so much fun at the moment 8===D 

Maybe when people stop shedding crocodile tears every time I make a post, I'll adjust my style.


----------



## Euclid (Mar 20, 2014)

Sleeping around (promiscuity) is morally reprehensible and has no place in the kingdom of ends.


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

Veggie said:


> No, you present it like it's objective "market value" and act all "don't shoot the messenger!" ...until you get called out on it, and then it's all just personal preference.
> 
> I'm still waiting for you to answer my questions about yours
> 
> ...


As a great man once said, you can't always get what you want. I answered your questions that weren't obvious leads to a pre-conceived conclusion.


----------



## OutsideLookingIn391 (Mar 10, 2017)

Rock Of Ages said:


> Thank you for the compliment. I just can't help but notice that these women (by and large) have no sense of humour whatsoever.
> 
> Being an irreverent slut-shamer is so much fun at the moment 8===D Maybe when people stop shedding crocodile tears every time I make a post, I'll adjust my style.


That picture you dude? You're a kid. You mask your immaturity with an arrogant diatribe of moral supremacy? Come back in 20 years when you've gained some wisdom. Shave that beard, it's morally repugnant.


----------



## theflame (Apr 12, 2014)

It's amusing how people act like I'm waiting until marriage. Did I say people had to wait until marriage? No. I have casual hook ups but it's always been with people I've liked or have wanted to date -- not just anything that walks.


----------



## theflame (Apr 12, 2014)

Immaturity is sleeping with everything you find attractive and not having the will power to say no for once.


----------



## Cast (Dec 20, 2016)

Rock Of Ages said:


> Thank you for the compliment. I just can't help but notice that these women (by and large) have no sense of humour whatsoever. Being an irreverent slut-shamer is so much fun at the moment 8===D
> 
> Maybe when people stop shedding crocodile tears every time I make a post, I'll adjust my style.


Er... not accepting to be randomly, groundlessly insulted (or, in my case, to let others be insulted) now means lacking sense of humor?
Good luck having adult, logical, coherent discussions while you have fun calling names. That's what a third grader usually does, but ok, go on pissing everyone just for the sake of it. I'm sure this will lead to some constructive debate.


----------



## Cast (Dec 20, 2016)

@theflame please, please, would you tag or quote people? At the moment, you're just arguing against the wall. I asked you a few questions and made a few points, would you kindly answer to that, instead of attacking an argument literally no-one made?


----------



## theflame (Apr 12, 2014)

Again you are free to do as you please, doesn't mean that someone decent has to accept your promiscuous past. Again, you can always find someone like yourself who will be accepting of it.


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

Updating...

Pro casual sex
ENTP
ESTP 6w7
ISTP
ENTP 7w8
INFJ 7

Anti casual sex
INFJ
INFJ 4w3
INTJ
ISTJ
INTP


Unsurprisingly it looks like this is kind of a J/P thing, related to conscientiousness (desire for order/structure) and _maybe_ to some extent introversion/extroversion. I am also interested to see if there are clusters in the Enneagrams (heart type vs head type), it's too hard to tell that right now...but it looks like my profiling has been mostly accurate.


----------



## theflame (Apr 12, 2014)

Cast said:


> @theflame please, please, would you tag or quote people? At the moment, you're just arguing against the wall. I asked you a few questions and made a few points, would you kindly answer to that, instead of attacking an argument literally no-one made?


Again, to anyone who disagrees with what I say...do I need to spell it out for you?


----------



## theflame (Apr 12, 2014)

Cast said:


> @theflame please, please, would you tag or quote people? At the moment, you're just arguing against the wall. I asked you a few questions and made a few points, would you kindly answer to that, instead of attacking an argument literally no-one made?



Also if you'll notice, I have a non-caring attitude toward people who think certain ways of me as the feeling is mutual...that is why I still do say and think what I want, no matter what you nay sayers to self-respect and dignity say.


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

OutsideLookingIn391 said:


> That picture you dude? You're a kid. You mask your immaturity with an arrogant diatribe of moral supremacy? Come back in 20 years when you've gained some wisdom. Shave that beard, it's morally repugnant.


!!!

I am almost ten years older than some of the posters who support unrestrained sexual freedom in this thread - some of them are probably still at high school. Clean up your own mess before preaching to me.


----------



## Cast (Dec 20, 2016)

theflame said:


> Again, to anyone who disagrees with what I say...do I need to spell it out for you?


You have not made a logical argument to respond to anyone's criticism, so yes, please, spell it out. Possibly answering something people actually said <3




Rock Of Ages said:


> Updating...
> 
> Pro casual sex
> ENTP
> ...


You're splitting as a pro vs anti casual sex, but it's not what people are saying. The argument at the moment is split between "people who have casual sex have no dignity and self-respect" vs "please don't go around universally judging wether people have dignity and self-respect according to your standards".
Personally, I'm for sex only in really committed relationship - otherwise, as I said, _to me_ it's masturbation at most. This doesn't mean I go around bragging about other people are not decent, have no self-respect, are undignified and degraded, unworthy of respect, etc. A few posts back I quoted literal examples of how the phrasing was self-righteous, offensive and judgmental.


----------



## OutsideLookingIn391 (Mar 10, 2017)

Rock Of Ages said:


> !!!
> 
> I am almost ten years older than some of the posters who support unrestrained sexual freedom in this thread - some of them are still at high school. Clean up your own mess before preaching to me.


Not preaching you. Just observing arrogance masking insecurity in action. Hurts, don't it bro.. U so cool.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

Rock Of Ages said:


> As a great man once said, you can't always get what you want. I answered your questions that weren't obvious leads to a pre-conceived conclusion.


I didn't have one, other than that it was at least unlikely that you were Christian Grey, as that's kinda who you've been swaggering around like. lol.

If you mean the part about manipulation, that wasn't a lead, though many people may see your statement that way (as being manipulative). Doesn't mean you'd have to though. Curious to see how you'd defend yourself against public opinion since it seems to be important to you.


----------



## Cast (Dec 20, 2016)

> @theflame
> You say it's degrading to have sex with multiple partners, or sex with someone who had multiple partners - because that would be not special to you. But previously you said that casual sex with a single partner is ok.
> What's special to you about fucking a guy just to relieve your sexual urges? That's what dogs do*. _In-and-out in-and-out in-and-out oh shit I finished - that was good, bye. I'll call you when I need a hole to relieve my sexual urges again._ Talking about degradation...
> 
> ...


 @theflame I don't know what are these _certain ways_ I'm supposed to think about you, so it's good you don't care about it. I probably didn't mean any personal opinion on you that you apparently gathered from my posts.
Now, would you kindly answer to this post?
And possibly also to my first post you totally ignored:


> @theflame , could you explain why do you view sex with different partners as undignified and lack of self respect? Also what do you mean by "cover up"?


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

theflame said:


> No one needs to accept anything they don't want to accept. If you don't accept that people like monogamous sex better than promiscuous sex, someone doesn't have to accept your promiscuous past. It goes both ways.


It is interesting how people feel totally okay with casting judgment in the other direction.... You can scorn those with stronger morals, higher emotional sensitivity, and/or simply different preferences that call for monogamy and stricter discrimination with sexual partners, but oh no, don't judge the promiscuous!

Personally, sexual promiscuity is a major turn-off. It suggests a kind of hardened attitude, emotional detachment and selfishness towards sex. Plus, I do attach moral value to actions, and sex is a pretty serious thing, being it can produce new humans, bond people, spread disease, and is generally _intimate_. 

People aren't static though, and the past is the past, so their current attitude towards sex is most relevant. My _visceral reaction_ towards promiscuity in a man is revulsion though. This is for potential partners...for everyone else, that's their business and irrelevant to me. I think people can judge their potential partner on whatever criteria they please too, albeit it may limit their pool considerably, but that's the problem of the individual.


----------



## theflame (Apr 12, 2014)

And coming from people who don't think having class or self-respect are important aspects in finding someone decent, you have no room to comment about anyone else anyway.


----------



## changos (Nov 21, 2011)

theflame said:


> Again, to anyone who disagrees with what I say...do I need to spell it out for you?





theflame said:


> It's amusing how people act like I'm waiting until marriage. Did I say people had to wait until marriage? No. I have casual hook ups but it's always been with people I've liked or have wanted to date -- not just anything that walks.


We can't use voice-tone when writing on a forum, so please imagine me on a quiet, peaceful and friendly voice making this comment almost like whispering: your style used in this thread will get people bored, and unable to nail you on specifics, it's wide, vague. You have placed what I consider valid short arguments but not quite connected forming a whole, it all sounds as if you feel someone hurt you, or that in present time you feel going out (dating) is actually as a contract, or people owing you something. I think is fun to discuss even with diff ideas, but I don't see this going nowhere. Simply put, it's not an opinion, or the way I think or others think: if anyone walks into a going out and turns on day #5 into a date... well many will have their horses near, is up to each person to open up and decide what to do with the horses. So far, we all invest on friends, family, more than friends and even FWB (sort of saying "invest") and I don't think anyone just new applies to make any other person CUT ties or limit what's there just because.

Relationships build over time.
We might find out stuff we don't like (present, past)
We might find the other person has plans for us that we don't agree with

Talking and negotiating is allowed, saying no is also allowed. Pretending people PAST... matches our views and principles... or to be at a level were we can say "ok I like your past, approved" seems selfish and childish to me. There are things out of limits but is a personal choice, I won't go with some orgy past, but multiple sex partners? while I might not like it, well, that person didn't even know I existed, and while my ideas might sound weird on time, at first (in cold) will sound arrogant.

The problem that I face here is... given the context and how the thread is developing, the words for me to use are clear, but I don't like how they sound and I'm trying to avoid using them (like, make your rant, express yourself and move on).


----------



## theflame (Apr 12, 2014)

If you think it's immature to have class, dignity and self-respect, you can think that all you want, lol.


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

Veggie said:


> I didn't have one, other than that it was at least unlikely that you were Christian Grey, as that's kinda who you've been swaggering around like. lol.


Well a lot of women seem to like Christian Grey, so maybe my detractors on PerC are struggling to reconcile their outrage with their primal attraction to me  



Veggie said:


> If you mean the part about manipulation, that wasn't a lead, though many people may see your statement that way (as being manipulative). Doesn't mean you'd have to though. Curious to see how you'd defend yourself against public opinion since it seems to be important to you.


I admit that I am arrogant and a little vain, but at least I don't pretend to be something I'm not. This is why I enjoy shaking up the many people who I perceive to be hypocritical. I enjoy exposing the self-righteous church girls and political activists who moan like whores after work as a group of illegal immigrants team them raw dog. Just imagine what God would think! (1 Corinthians 6:18, ladies.)

Oh, men and women alike are my victims, but as this is a thread about slutty behaviour, eh...I'm going to wage war on the feminist movement. I should add that I'm having a _lot_ of fun watching people's reactions.


----------



## Ntwadumela (Mar 19, 2017)

theflame said:


> Like I said to those who "disagree" with what I say -- very few women like me left. Women these days just wanna give out free sex without the man needing to work for it, smh.


How is, "making a man work for it" somehow a virtuous position? You're basically saying you're a high class escort and not a cheap street walker. It's the same thing, just at a different price. Actually being virtuous would involve having sex based on who you like and who liked you back, not who put out the most effort.


----------



## Mange (Jan 9, 2011)

Rock Of Ages said:


> . Like I said to another girl back there, she'd be doing me a favour by rejecting me..


I said that to you, not vice versa. Don't stop deluding yourself now though,keep going. It makes for interesting entertainment opcorn:


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

Kyn said:


> You and @Rock Of Ages should hook up. You're like the perfect virgin couple, with exactly the same worldview. I see a PerC wedding on the horizon.


Well now; that can only be a good thing.

@theflame D'you want to become my PerC wife? It looks like somebody is happy to marry us for free.


----------



## theflame (Apr 12, 2014)

Lol, yes. And to those people who don't think having class should be important -- they can do what they want -- I just hope that they don't think they have any self-respect. They can't contradict themselves and say they respect themselves when they give out the goodies for free and the guys they meet don't have to work for it.



Rock Of Ages said:


> Well now; that can only be a good thing.
> 
> @theflame D'you want to become my PerC wife? It looks like somebody is happy to marry us for free.


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

theflame said:


> Lol, yes. And to those people who don't think having class should be important -- they can do what they want -- I just hope that they don't think they have any self-respect. They can't contradict themselves and say they respect themselves when they give out the goodies for free and the guys they meet don't have to work for it.


Sweet, I knew you would say yes. @Kyn Organize this please.


----------



## Cast (Dec 20, 2016)

Give out their goodies for free. So classy.
One would think that not considering your genitals as an _exchange good people need to buy_ is part of self-respect.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

Rock Of Ages said:


> Well a lot of women seem to like Christian Grey, so maybe my detractors on PerC are struggling to reconcile their outrage with their primal attraction to me


Christian Grey is a self made entrepreneur billionaire depicted by ripped af, omg that face, Jamie Dornan. Are you saying there's a correlation? Lol.

And actually, despite that, he still treated little Anastasia like she was the prize. (Then again - she was a virgin!)



Rock Of Ages said:


> Oh, men and women alike are my victims, but as this is a thread about slutty behaviour, eh...I'm going to wage war on the feminist movement. I should add that I'm having a _lot_ of fun watching people's reactions.


This thread isn't really about slutty behavior. It seems to be about how the OP likely can't get a man's attention, based on what was said at the end, and so she blames it on that she doesn't dress like a slut (because as we know, there's a direct link there with someone's sexual practices), and rationalizes that she's one of the "classy" and dignified, like these are things men aren't also interested in... (and open to interpretation anyway).

As far as monogamous casual sex... I was trying to start a dialogue with changos there, but he only ever responds to me anymore when he's indirectly addressing and insulting me. That's a rather large area of grey though too.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

theflame said:


> Lol, yes. And to those people who don't think having class should be important -- they can do what they want -- I just hope that they don't think they have any self-respect. They can't contradict themselves and say they respect themselves when they give out the goodies for free and the guys they meet don't have to work for it.


Girl, one of those classless broads just gave out _your_ goodies for free and you leapt at the attention :laughing::tongue:


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

Veggie said:


> Christian Grey is a self made entrepreneur billionaire depicted by ripped af, omg that face, Jamie Dornan. Are you saying there's a correlation? Lol.


Well you were the one who suggested the comparison. I don't think I am much like Christian Grey at all, but I took it in stride as a compliment. 



Veggie said:


> This thread isn't really about slutty behavior. It seems to be about how the OP likely can't get a man's attention, based on what was said at the end, and so she blames it on that she doesn't dress like a slut (because as we know, there's a direct link there with someone's sexual practices), and rationalizes that she's one of the "classy" and dignified, like these are things men aren't also interested in... (and open to interpretation anyway).


I know that there are is a contingent of young women out there who do not approve of the feminist movement, because of its hostility to men and its permissive attitude towards casual sex and abortion. They are not well represented in popular culture, but they do exist, and OP clearly is one of them.

You also don't know anything about her ability to attract men or lack thereof. Whether you meant it or not, this comes across like character assassination to try and undermine her argument.



Veggie said:


> As far as monogamous casual sex... I was trying to start a dialogue with changos there, but he only ever responds to me anymore when he's indirectly addressing and insulting me. That's a rather large area of grey though too.


I don't approve of casual sex, whether it's with one person at a time or more. That is irrelevant - sex is a very emotional act for me. I can't relate to people who habitually detach themselves from that, as it just seems inauthentic and shallow.


----------



## _Ionic (Jul 8, 2016)

theflame said:


> I think I specifically stated in my OP I see what a person is like in their views on sex and commitment, doesn't matter if it's a guy or a girl.


Just to clarify with you, is that the only thing that matters to you when seeing a person for who they really are? That you can get a good idea of the person based on their views on sex and commitment alone?


----------



## Handsome Dyke (Oct 4, 2012)

theflame said:


> Again, to anyone who disagrees with what I say...do I need to spell it out for you?


No. You're a troll. The end.


----------



## Kynx (Feb 6, 2012)

Rock Of Ages said:


> Sweet, I knew you would say yes. @Kyn Organize this please.


Dearly beloved..... 


* *


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

Rock Of Ages said:


> Well you were the one who suggested the comparison. I don't think I am much like Christian Grey at all, but I took it in stride as a compliment.


Your interpretation of posts is amusing. I was saying that you were behaving like someone with those credentials, when I found it highly unlikely that we had a Christian Grey in our midst - so my only conclusion of you was that you were arrogant (you've since admitted to this yourself). Now that I know more about you, I agree that you aren't much alike. What a surprise. Fictional billionaire Jamie Dornan's aren't a dime a dozen.



Rock Of Ages said:


> because of its hostility to men


Not centering your life around men and their opinion of you (and occasionally challenging them and asserting your own wants and needs) isn't the same as being hostile to them, for the record.



Rock Of Ages said:


> You also don't know anything about her ability to attract men or lack thereof. Whether you meant it or not, this comes across like character assassination to try and undermine her argument.





theflame said:


> ...I wonder who still covers up and doesn't need to show their goods to get a man's attention?


Well. If she has to wonder, you know who I bet isn't? theflame. (See how I put two and two together there?)



Rock Of Ages said:


> I don't approve of casual sex, full stop. Whether it's with one person at a time or more is irrelevant - sex is a very emotional act for me. I can't relate to people who habitually detach themselves from that, as it just seems inauthentic and shallow.


What are your thoughts on love-intense attraction at first sight and marriages that are more like business transactions, conversely?

Genuinely curious. Been trying to work mine out.


----------



## _Ionic (Jul 8, 2016)

theflame said:


> Like I said to those who "disagree" with what I say -- very few women like me left. Women these days just wanna give out free sex without the man needing to work for it, smh.
> 
> The assholes are people who give up freely what should be sacred between two people.


Your definition of "sacred" could mean a whole different definition to someone else. Calling someone an "asshole" just because they don't hold your same viewpoint makes you look like an asshole too.

Sure, you and plenty other women don't respect people who sleep around more often than you and are willing to have sex more easily than others. Great for you. That's your perspective. I don't necessarily have to agree with your assertion, but I'll definitely respect it. 

I feel as though you are attacking people on here just because they don't hold the same perspective as you. Nobody is disagreeing with your perspective, they are just disagreeing with your mentality that "all people who don't follow my perspective are assholes."

You can still disagree with somebody and still respect their choice/preference.


----------



## Cast (Dec 20, 2016)

It's so sacred you shouldn't be _giving away contact with your genitals for free_, as explicitly stated by @theflame, so it basically means you're selling sexual contact.
Ugh.
Sorry to repeat myself, but how would that be dignified?


----------



## _Ionic (Jul 8, 2016)

theflame said:


> If you think it's immature to have class, dignity and self-respect, you can think that all you want, lol.


Nobody thinks having self-respect, dignity and class is immature. It's just immature to impose those viewpoints on others, or immature to assume everybody should have the same viewpoint as you or be considered "assholes."

Oh but the last time I checked, I thought being classy meant handling every situation with dignity, consideration, and moderation in your actions to yourself and others. Seems to me you fall short on that classification based on your posts.

Before you start talking about people in general don't have class, take a look at yourself and see if your actions follow accordingly.


----------



## with water (Aug 13, 2014)

This thread is a flaming wreck.


----------



## atamagasuita (May 15, 2016)

theflame said:


> I send pretty pics, but I don't have to show my boobies. And you never know what people could do with your pictures as well so I don't send pics, either way.


I don't show my face because I'm ugly. Good thing


----------



## Antipode (Jul 8, 2012)

Ntwadumela said:


> How is, "making a man work for it" somehow a virtuous position? You're basically saying you're a high class escort and not a cheap street walker. It's the same thing, just at a different price. Actually being virtuous would involve having sex based on who you like and who liked you back, not who put out the most effort.



This is kind of the Achillies' Heel of the OP's argument that I've also noticed.

She says she has self-respect, because she isn't promiscuous with more than one person. She's defining what is self-respect.

However, she is fine with promiscuous discord as long as it is monogamous--with one person. She's defining what is self-respect.

The problem is if someone more "self-respecting" comes along and calls her out, saying that promiscuous sex, no matter what, outside of wedlock is of "lower-class," lacking self-respect.

Anyone who simply has sex with someone outside of a committed, binding relationship, is treating themselves disrespectfully, because, well, whatever reason one can come up with. Hell, one could even try to make an argument that giving your body up to anyone, even in marriage, is still lacking self-respect. 

These very people could also call her a "whore" and "trash," based on her own line of reasoning.

---

This is kind of the problem of being judgmental when you're not a perfect being. There will always be someone more "pure" than you, which makes your judgments more circular and ironic, than anything else.

A man steals $100.00,
A man steals $99.99,
A man steals $99.98,
...
A man steals $00.02
A man steals $00.01
A man steals nothing.

Only one of those people truly has clout to make such demands that stealing is wrong.


----------



## BearRun (Mar 3, 2017)

Rock Of Ages said:


> Well that's kind of obvious. I am very purposeful in my presentation as I want to screen out certain types of women. Like I said to another girl back there, she'd be doing me a favour by rejecting me.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You're successfully screening out virgins too. Well done? I'm not sure what you're going after here. You claim objectivity but I see no evidence of it. I'm not even one of the women you've been insulting and I still don't like you.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Males are dime a dozen

they work for prostitutes, as well

its women whom haven't figured 

it out

yet

source:

3 males standing in line to pay my bills,

with 2 more on hold

1 almost sold

edit:

most dudes are ugly, so a lot of females have difficult tyme doing A settle down,

buut rly good men are everywhere waiting to pounce sonny


----------



## BearRun (Mar 3, 2017)

Veggie said:


> Girl, one of those classless broads just gave out _your_ goodies for free and you leapt at the attention :laughing::tongue:


There's something weird about a woman calling her vagina the goodies, referring to them as something that is exchanged for something of value vs free and getting upset about other women's sex lives that is the epitome of lacking refinement. Everyone I've met, who was sophisticated and worth getting to know had more sense than to be so inelegant as the OP. How she can rip on other people for lacking self-respect and dignity while making such ******* show of herself is a joke.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

BearRun said:


> How she can rip on other people for lacking self-respect and dignity while making such ******* show of herself is a joke.


I forgive her though. Making a ******* show of yourself is in spirit with the sub-forum. Haha. Lots of sexually frustrated people up in here I think.


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

Honestly...I feel like half of you wouldn't recognize a joke if it danced naked in front of you.

I will never cease to be amazed at how precious some women can be about their lack of sexual sophistication. Hypocritical people really are the gift that keeps on giving.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

Rock Of Ages said:


> Honestly...I feel like half of you wouldn't recognize a joke if it danced naked in front of you.


Let's find out. Get naked and dance in front of us.

:shocked:

:laughing:


----------



## BearRun (Mar 3, 2017)

Rock Of Ages said:


> Honestly...I feel like half of you wouldn't recognize a joke if it danced naked in front of you.
> 
> I will never cease to be amazed at how precious some women can be about their lack of sexual sophistication. Hypocritical people really are the gift that keeps on giving.


Nice backpedaling. Interesting way to go about saving face.


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

BearRun said:


> You're successfully screening out virgins too. Well done? I'm not sure what you're going after here. You claim objectivity but I see no evidence of it. I'm not even one of the women you've been insulting and I still don't like you.


I don't judge someone for having had more or less sexual partners than I have had. I judge them based on the kind of sexual experiences they prefer, because this is a very reliable indicator of said person's values and personality.


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

BearRun said:


> Nice backpedaling. Interesting way to go about saving face.


LOL, in your dreams maybe.

This morning/afternoon I took on over five of you alone and won. It wasn't even a contest.


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

This thread is dripping wet with envy. I love to savour that sweet scent.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

Rock Of Ages said:


> LOL, in your dreams maybe.


In her dreams you save face?



Rock Of Ages said:


> This morning/afternoon I took on over five of you alone and won. It wasn't even a contest.


Yea, that last one was really impressive. You are slaying it with the witty comebacks.


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

Veggie said:


> In her dreams you save face?


She is secretly jealous that I'm engaged to @theflame instead of her. 



Veggie said:


> Yea, that last one was really impressive. You are slaying it with the witty comebacks.


This thread would be as dry as a menopausal feminist's womb without me. Just accept it


----------



## BearRun (Mar 3, 2017)

Rock Of Ages said:


> I don't judge someone for having had more or less sexual partners than I have had. I judge them based on the kind of sexual experiences they prefer, because this is a very reliable indicator of said person's values and personality.


That isn't controversial and isn't what you said. Are you confused or backpedaling?



Rock Of Ages said:


> LOL, in your dreams maybe.
> 
> This morning/afternoon I took on over five of you alone and won. It wasn't even a contest.


Arrogant and delusional. 



Rock Of Ages said:


> This thread is dripping wet with envy. I love to savour that sweet scent.


You should watch where you're backpedaling, you're mistaking the smell of your own shit for something pleasant.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

Rock Of Ages said:


> She is secretly jealous that I'm engaged to @theflame instead of her.


Oooohh. Accepting marriage proposals over the internet from strange men with bad reputations is some pretty advanced hard to get work for it action though  I think she won you fair and square.


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

BearRun said:


> That isn't controversial and isn't what you said. Are you confused or backpedaling?


Can you please quote a post of mine where I say I won't date women who are virgins or have had a lot more sexual partners than me? It is pretty obvious that what I am objecting to - I have said this time after time after time - is sex outside the confines of an exclusive relationship. Stop distorting my argument.



BearRun said:


> Arrogant and delusional.


*shrugs* I'll let casual readers scroll back and make their own decision.



BearRun said:


> You should watch where you're backpedaling, you're mistaking the smell of your own shit for something pleasant.


I only march in one direction: forward.


----------



## BearRun (Mar 3, 2017)

Rock Of Ages said:


> She is secretly jealous that I'm engaged to @theflame instead of her.
> 
> 
> 
> This thread would be as dry as a menopausal feminist's womb without me. Just accept it




Oh no! Not a dry womb. It's like arguing with a freshman high school kid. You need better comebacks.


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

BearRun said:


> Oh no! Not a dry womb. It's like arguing with a freshman high school kid. You need better comebacks.


The irony of that statement coming from a high school kid.


----------



## BearRun (Mar 3, 2017)

Rock Of Ages said:


> Can you please quote a post of mine where I say I won't date women who are virgins or have had a lot more sexual partners than me? It is pretty obvious that what I am objecting to - I have said this time after time after time - is sex outside the confines of an exclusive relationship. Stop distorting my argument.


I didn't say you did. You've conveniently forgotten the things you did say. Your memory is a dud.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

Rock Of Ages said:


> Can you please quote a post of mine where I say I won't date women who are virgins or have had a lot more sexual partners than me?


Women with more sexual partners are more likely to divorce and therefore aren't fit for marriage. You've probably made this argument like twenty times on the forum now.


----------



## BearRun (Mar 3, 2017)

Rock Of Ages said:


> The irony of that statement coming from a high school kid.


Ms. College Kid to you.


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

Veggie said:


> Women with more sexual partners are more likely to divorce and therefore aren't fit for marriage. You've probably made this argument like twenty times on the forum now.


This phenomenon isn't binary but gradual, so if I've had say, 2 or 3 sexual partners, there will be a lot of women who have had more and are still not likely to divorce.

The general principle is that less, ehm, "experienced" women are more loyal. This is a particularly un-PC fact because it implies that the sexual revolution/feminism are directly responsible for rising marital infidelity. But as always with statistics, the devil is in the details.

Try again.


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

BearRun said:


> Ms. College Kid to you.


A degree is just a piece of paper, babe. It doesn't make you special.


----------



## BearRun (Mar 3, 2017)

Rock Of Ages said:


> A degree is just a piece of paper, babe. It doesn't make you special.


No shit. I'm participating in my parents paper exercise. As long as it's not my money, I'll waste 4 years on their crap.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

Rock Of Ages said:


> The general principle is that less, ehm, "experienced" women are more loyal. This is a particularly un-PC fact because it implies that the sexual revolution/feminism are directly responsible for rising marital infidelity. But as always with statistics, the devil is in the details.


I don't see why women being less likely to stay in bad marriages out of necessity is a bad thing. Or being choosier about what they want (in relationships, if not sex... though even "promiscuous" women can be choosy in sex - but it doesn't require loyalty necessarily).

Men could try to make themselves better partner material if that's what they're after, but that would probably impede on their walking around like God's gift to women. If. They do such things. Not that all do.


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

BearRun said:


> No shit. I'm participating in my parents paper exercise. As long as it's not my money, I'll waste 4 years on their crap.


You are a bit of a rogue, I'll give you that.


----------



## BearRun (Mar 3, 2017)

Veggie said:


> I don't see why women being less likely to stay in bad marriages out of necessity is a bad thing. Or being choosier about what they want (in relationships, if not sex... though even "promiscuous" women can be choosy in sex - but it doesn't require loyalty necessarily).
> 
> Men could try to make themselves better partner material if that's what they're after, but that would probably impede on their walking around like God's gift to women. If. They do such things. Not that all do.


I agree with the first part to a degree. I disagree with presuming issues are a guys fault when a marriage breaks down.


----------



## BearRun (Mar 3, 2017)

Rock Of Ages said:


> You are a bit of a rogue, I'll give you that.


I barely graduated high school. I'm a shitty student. When I realized my parents made a lovely donation to this school and I was magically accepted, I was embarrassed. Then I decided as long as I'm attending, they continue making lovely donations subsidizing real students. I consider my participation a contribution to a worthy cause.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

BearRun said:


> I agree with the first part to a degree. I disagree with presuming issues are a guys fault when a marriage breaks down.


Well, I do too. I do think that overall though women are more likely to accept fault for what went wrong. Maybe not.

Mostly I'm annoyed with the mentality of dudes who want a serious relationship, but put it all on the woman.


----------



## Meliodas (Nov 16, 2016)

BearRun said:


> I barely graduated high school. I'm a shitty student. When I realized my parents made a lovely donation to this school and I was magically accepted, I was embarrassed. Then I decided as long as I'm attending, they continue making lovely donations subsidizing real students. I consider my participation a contribution to a worthy cause.


I always hated college because you simply memorize and regurgitate information, it's not a creative place. You don't actually make things, creating and crafting images of your own personality that you can taste, touch, hear, see and smell. Besides, people are so fucking pretentious, it's unbelievable. 

I have some sympathy for people in your situation; you have the burden of patronage on your shoulders. My parents paid my fees as well, and my mom at least was furious when I dropped out and got a job as a labourer. But as usual I will have the last laugh, as I have started my own business this year. I am determined to form my own band, as well, so no doubt you will all be seeing my face and hearing my name screamed by teenage girls before too long. (So snap me up while you can, ladies!)

My view is that if you are intelligent and motivated enough, there is more than one way to succeed in life. But I digress.


----------



## BearRun (Mar 3, 2017)

Veggie said:


> Well, I do too. I do think that overall though women are more likely to accept fault for what went wrong. Maybe not.
> 
> Mostly I'm annoyed with the mentality of dudes who want a serious relationship, but put it all on the woman.


I think it's a two way street with a lot of relationship failures. Guys not listening until the reconciliation boat has sailed and women failing to communicate the seriousness of the situation before they're ready to start divorce proceedings. That's what it looks like to me. Neither of these people are pillars of good relationship skills. People suck.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

Rock Of Ages said:


> The same people who support total sexual freedom tend to also reliably support certain political positions. Maybe this is Ni gone mad but from spending time on the forum, I have created what I feel are quite predictive profiles of people's values and politics, mainly based on their sexual preferences.


Politically, I've pretty much played devil's advocate for conservatives on this forum. I'm mostly liberal when it comes to sexual freedom.



Rock Of Ages said:


> The way she has been treated is pretty bad if you consider that the "slut pride" crowd claims to care about all women.


Caring about women's rights =/= believing that women should all act like Dr. Phil towards each other in their interactions 

I actually RESPECT women enough to believe that they can take what they dish 

Also, no one is advocating "slut pride" - they're advocating making their own decisions about how, where and when they make the decision to sleep with someone. You also seem to think that they're making the same decision repeatedly? I've had sex right away (though I can't say I've ever had many official one night stands, tbh. I usually hear from and see the guy again in those instances) and I've built a little anticipation too. It's all situational.



Chesire Tower said:


> Please explain "free shit for their vaginas"; is that a reference to vibrators and dildoes? :confused2:


Who's handing out free vibrators?? Haha. Toys are expensive.



Chesire Tower said:


> Who honestly is saying/believing anything remotely close to that? I think that people who disagree with the OP; are saying that the vast majority of women aren't having sex as a means to manipulate men, and are doing it for their own reasons. * I personally have yet to talk to a single woman who prefers promiscuity to having a relationship.* This is a fallatious assumption. I personally see no point to one night stands but again; so do a lot of men.


I sorta do at this point. Most men don't know how to be partners imo. Or they're judgmental hypocrites. Or they do something to frustrate or annoy me too early, thinking they hold the cards. I like the chemistry and energy of flings... and the idea that there's more on the horizon. Tbh though, I doubt I'm actually that "promiscuous" anyway. I have been single for about five years now, other than brief dating stints... and I love waking up and going to bed alone. 

If I didn't have a biological clock (I might still want a family) I wouldn't be concerned much at all. (I went a year and a half dating and sex free, mostly just burying myself in books and theory and nerdy internet activity... it was great, lol). It's ticking though :dry:



Chesire Tower said:


> Have you actually encountered a single straight woman who would seriously be opposed to settling down with the right man; should he exist? I highly doubt it; no one is that insane.


Why is that insane? If I met him after about 38-40 I might pass. I like the idea of a family unit, but otherwise I'm not sure it would be worth committing myself and lifestyle to one other person. If my window for the unit closes, I'd maybe rather throw all of my energy into a project - maybe try to write a book, start a business. Maybe I could try the whole Cougar thing for fun for sexual needs, haha. One last hurrah done right before menopause. I've always been good at compartmentalizing. I'm sure my brother and his wife are going to have kids, so I could still play auntie... and I'd have my fortress to do whatever I wanted otherwise.


----------



## theflame (Apr 12, 2014)

I can see why some of you women on here are single and it isn't the men who are the problem. If I was a man and I met a woman with a piss poor attitude who had no self-respect or dignity, I wouldn't want to date ya'll sluts/whores, either if I was a decent man. No good man wants a negative Nancy. IS this the way ya'll talk to men in real life? @Veggie @Cast @BearRun and whoever else I missed?


----------



## Cast (Dec 20, 2016)

@theflame thanks for your concern for my relationship status. I'm really touched. Now, where did you gather that I have casual sex with multiple partners? Are you calling me a slut on some basis?

Edit: yeah, go on offending me and half of the people here. I won't respond any further since you seem only interested in insulting. But please don't stop bragging about your high moral standards.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

theflame said:


> I can see why some of you women on here are single and it isn't the men who are the problem. If I was a man and I met a woman with a piss poor attitude who had no self-respect or dignity, I wouldn't want to date ya'll sluts/whores, either if I was a decent man. No good man wants a negative Nancy. IS this the way ya'll talk to men in real life? @Veggie @Cast @BearRun and whoever else I missed?


Am I being negative? I'm stating wants and needs. And yea, I can see why I'm single too. I just told you. LOL. But you're pretty obviously one of those women who bases your worth on whether or not you have a man, so all you see is the single status.

Oh, btw. Do you?  

Have a man, that is.

I actually have been seeing someone, for the record. But distance is an issue, and I don't think we're sexually compatible.

Do I talk to men like this in real life? Like how I'm talking to @Rock Of Ages? I don't talk to men like him in real life. He's not my type, and I doubt we'd have the rapport via text and phone that I look for before agreeing to go out with a guy. I like that to be light and buzzy and fun, and I get told that I can be very charming actually


----------



## theflame (Apr 12, 2014)

@Cast keep talking the way you do and you can keep being single.


----------



## theflame (Apr 12, 2014)

Oh, and by the way @Cast and @Veggie, if you talk differently in real life and aren't a stuck up know-it-all in real life, why do you act like that online? Think you're tough behind the keys? I dare you to talk to people in person the way you talk to posters online and see what happens. I speak online the same exact way as I do in person. I don't take on another persona the way some of you tough keys do on here.


----------



## Cast (Dec 20, 2016)

@theflame oh, now you know for sure I'm single. Ok. I'll give the news to my long term partner then.

I'll repeat it here since I probably edited my post after you read it:
Edit: yeah, go on offending me and half of the people here. I won't respond any further since you seem only interested in insulting. But please don't stop bragging about your high moral standards.


----------



## atamagasuita (May 15, 2016)

Chesire Tower said:


> @atamagasuita, I don't know whether or not you've weighed in yet on this thread or not but I (and I'm sure numerous others) would love to hear your response.


Oh yeah never had casual sex u know.. I'm too hot to easily give my body to some fucking jerk.


----------



## theflame (Apr 12, 2014)

@Cast @Veggie for people who think you know-it-all you sure do seem to know very little about life.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

theflame said:


> Oh, and by the way @Cast and @Veggie, if you talk differently in real life and aren't a stuck up know-it-all in real life, why do you act like that online? Think you're tough behind the keys? I dare you to talk to people in person the way you talk to posters online and see what happens. I speak online the same exact way as I do in person. I don't take on another persona the way some of you tough keys do on here.


Oooh, do I talk to people like a stuck up know it all in real life? You should have specified. I do actually apparently. HAHA. Though you and your boy are definitely kicking it up a notch with what you're doing. I was being cool with you both originally, and you weren't having that. I guess you need your evangelical projections to stay what they are to make sense of your worlds and who you are within them. I get it. Life's scary sometimes.

Some guys are into it though. One told me that his first impression of me, specifically, was - "Slightly pretentious, sassy, a weird mix of conservative and liberal that he couldn't put his finger on, 'California' (<which was kinda weird because I'm an east coast girl), ...maybe a little crazy." He still contacts me, actually. But he lied about his age and he has kids, which I'm not looking to get involved with right now.

I see you're new here. My persona here is pretty linked to who I am "irl" - I talk to a number of members here on a more personal basis, I've actually met several, I've posted pictures, videos, I Skype... so, yea.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

theflame said:


> @Cast @Veggie for people who think you know-it-all you sure do seem to know very little about life.


Really, how so?

Also, you're sidestepping the question?

How's life with the hubby? Boyfriend? FWB?

...anyone?


----------



## theflame (Apr 12, 2014)

@Cast, if you'll notice I'm not phased by your condescending hypocritical attitude. I still think, talk and do how I please...you should keep up that I don't care what an Internet person like you thinks when you aren't better than anyone on here.


----------



## theflame (Apr 12, 2014)

@Cast, I'm pointing out how hypocritical you are with you thinking you can judge people when you aren't better off when I talk about your relationship status. If you want to get on someone, better have a solid marriage yourself. @Veggie but most of you condescending posters aren't even in relationships and not by choice!


----------



## _Ionic (Jul 8, 2016)

theflame said:


> @Veggie @Cast @BearRun
> 
> I'm concerned that these people who one starred my thread don't think it's important to have self-respect and dignity and they justify their stances saying well men can sleep around and not be called sluts. Then again, in other threads, these same posters have also admitted they are messed up in the head -- quoting themselves they call themselves messed up so I can see why they don't have any dignity & self respect to begin with.
> 
> No one will love you if you don't love yourself.


Isn't that self respect and dignity? Acknowledging the faults in themselves and the failures they had? Like another user on this thread said, Self respect arises from self awareness. If you are aware about yourself and how your actions portray the person you want to be and act accordingly to those values isn't that self respect and dignity? 

You are condemning these people for their previous actions but not acknowledging the fact that these people know what they did wrong in the past and are trying to change their ways.

It's almost as if you are contradicting yourself by saying "no one will love you if you don't love yourself." These people do love themselves. It's just that you don't love their decision to change because you are holding their past against them. If they didn't, they would continue to lie to themselves and convince themselves they are not the problem by denying the problem.


----------



## Cast (Dec 20, 2016)

@theflame It's the third time you mention me to spit some personal attack, after I explicitly wrote that I'm not interested in this hysterical babblig, so please stop mentioning me. I heard relaxing a bit grealty helps with burning stomach, in case you need to know.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

theflame said:


> @Cast, I'm pointing out how hypocritical you are with you thinking you can judge people when you aren't better off when I talk about your relationship status. If you want to get on someone, better have a solid marriage yourself. @Veggie but most of you condescending posters aren't even in relationships and not by choice!


I don't care whether you have a man or not. I'm pointing out the irony that you don't when you keep using that as a put down.

I could tell you that it's by choice, I mean, to a degree - I'm open to the possibility, but I can't control the universe placing Romeo in front of me - anyway... I could do it until I'm blue in the face, and you wouldn't likely believe me. I have had a lot of opportunities with quality dudes, though. But I'm holding out for something special if I commit. I still want it to happen in this particular way, under certain conditions, to feel really good... idk. I might be wanting something unrealistic. I'm okay with that though. Single spinster life begins to look more and more appealing the older I get.


----------



## theflame (Apr 12, 2014)

@Cast @Veggie And drop the attitudes, seriously. This is the Internet, you aren't anything special and you probably haven't had as nearly as much life experiences as I have. You sound really young.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

theflame said:


> @Cast @Veggie And drop the attitudes, seriously. This is the Internet, you aren't anything special and you probably haven't had as nearly as much life experiences as I have. You sound really young.


I'm assuming I'm about your age. I started wondering if you were maybe in high school at first, for the record, felt a little guilty... until you made the post about the dude you had to nag with a kid. Then you made a comment about being in your early thirties.

I'm kinda special 

Keep lecturing us on our attitudes too. LOL.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

_Ionic said:


> If they didn't, they would continue to lie to themselves and convince themselves they are not the problem by denying the problem.


I kinda followed this post up until this bit.

I know what the problem _is_ but I don't know it's necessarily worth changing. I'm kinda more trying to figure out how to work _with _the problem.

It's honestly not all me. I self blamed for years, and it's pretty liberating actually to realize that I have been doing more than enough of my share in many ways. Posters like flame annoy me, because it's putting even more on the woman, and perpetuating the idea that there must be a "problem" if she's single.


----------



## theflame (Apr 12, 2014)

@Veggie @Cast people of experiences don't feel the need to have an Internet superiority complex, they just share their experiences to those who will make use of it. I don't feel the need to be the way you both are. You have other underlying issues, which you both have admitted, so I'm not going to take anything either of you say personally. You both know you're not right in the head and you have said and admitted that yourselves.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

theflame said:


> @Veggie @Cast people of experiences don't feel the need to have an Internet superiority complex, they just share their experiences to those who will make use of it. I don't feel the need to be the way you both are. You have other underlying issues, which you both have admitted, so I'm not going to take anything either of you say personally. You both know you're not right in the head and you have said and admitted that yourselves.


Are you actually serious? You're the one going on and on about self respect and dignity as if it only exists by your supposedly superior definition of trapping men and sharing very little of your own experiences, even when prompted.

I'm an open book about mine, until they're judged. Then I'll go defensive-offensive, sure. Arguing on the internet is kinda fun anyway  Plus, I feel like the universe... listens. Even if you don't. The more vocal I am, the more synchronicity pops up and who knows? Maybe it'll lead me to Romeo \o/

See? I'm proactive.

I've never said that I'm "not right in the head" - you said that and I asked, are you referring to me? Then I went on to explain that I have issues with gender. I don't think that means that I'm "not right in the head" though, unless I'm joking. Self deprecation can be fun too.


----------



## _Ionic (Jul 8, 2016)

Veggie said:


> I kinda followed this post up until this bit.
> 
> I know what the problem _is_ but I don't know it's necessarily worth changing. I'm kinda more trying to figure out how to work _with _the problem.
> 
> It's honestly not all me. I self blamed for years, and it's pretty liberating actually to realize that I have been doing more than enough of my share in many ways. Posters like flame annoy me, because it's putting even more on the woman, and perpetuating the idea that there must be a "problem" if she's single.


I agree. Although if a problem isn't worth changing then can you classify it as not being a problem at all? More like, idk, choosing a different path or preference and living through with it?

Exactly. Being single comes from choice as well whether circumstances are presented to you like you mentioned. Posts like that annoy me because it is placing self respect and dignity in how many sexual partners you have and not acknowledging the fact that one's views of self respect and dignity are subjective. So it doesn't matter whether or not someone thinks you lack self respect or dignity, as long as that person is acting to the values he/she presented to themselves, then they have self respect. Hence the name self-respect.

It's ironic though the name of this thread is "having self respect and dignity in dating" but much of the blame here has been placed on women. Like, both men and women participate in dating.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

_Ionic said:


> I agree. Although if a problem isn't worth changing then can you classify it as not being a problem at all? More like, idk, choosing a different path or preference and living through with it?


The commitment stuff really is kind of a problem. Because I'd like the end goal of a marriage that happened before forty and at least the possibility of a family unit - but I'm only willing to compromise so much when it comes to how I get there. 

Easy would be simply choosing the life path plan I have for forty now, getting my tubes tied and going with it - which I've considered doing for the sake of direction - but I'd feel like I gave up or something too, I think. Still, I do not want that to prompt me into desperate or man trapping behavior.


----------



## snowbell (Apr 2, 2012)

Locked for review.


----------

