posted February 24, 2007 10:08 PM         

quote:

---

http://www.guardian.co.uk/women/story/0,,1999060,00.html

---

posted February 26, 2007 07:56 PM         

There's also a good kind of b*tch . Which is a compliment urrr for whatever reasons.

But honestly, I think these things are not too deep. I once read an article about the word c*nt, and the psychology behind it - has the world gone mad?! tho I did find it funny that some starlet sent a necklace or whatever with c*nt on it to another starlet I mean really..

posted February 26, 2007 09:07 PM         

Next time a female friend spots me a cup of coffee, I'll be sure to say, "Thanks, you're such a b*tch".

posted February 26, 2007 09:26 PM         

quote:

---

Next time a female friend spots me a cup of coffee, I'll be sure to say, "Thanks, you're such a b*tch".

---

I think only other women and gay men can get away with that. It just means you're clever, witty in a slightly evil/honest way...depending how you look at it. It's a compliment, but I wouldn't shout it across a crowded room.

posted February 26, 2007 10:30 PM         

The man asking you for your number was the compliment. Being called a b*tch was not.

posted February 26, 2007 10:32 PM         

quote:

---

(instead of going out and taking it out on any woman or child he finds on the road!!!)

---

Jesus Christ

quote:

---

Totally.
I think prostitutes may very well be
the unsung heroes of our day and age.
I think its quite possible
that more marriages have been saved
by prostitutes than marriage counsellors,
and maybe more lives have been saved
by prostitutes than psychiatrists.

---

Prostitutes who do it for the money, i understand. Those who do it for *ahem* empowerment, i don’t. You cannot be empowered by someone else. A women relying on a man to make her feel powerful...hardly impressive.

The porno topic is interesting. I used to hate those women, since I was a late bloomer. I believed them being them, stopped me from being me. It’s because of them I felt bad about my umm vacant chest area. Truth is, I was making myself feel bad and holding myself back, and blaming it on someone else.

posted February 26, 2007 10:37 PM         

*edit* Whoa, how do I miss these things

quote:

---

The man asking you for your number was the compliment. Being called a b*tch was not.

Feel complimented for attracting someone, don't feel complimented by their own inability to handle your rejection.

---

Ok, I get what you mean...but I was coming from a place of frustration....sorry about that.

posted February 26, 2007 10:53 PM         

quote:

---

This is a feminist invention? Twisting the meaning of an obvious insult to convince one's self that it is in any way complimentary actually sounds like a lack of self-esteem. Hardly empowerment; it seems more like the self-defense mechanism of delusion.

---

posted February 27, 2007 04:49 PM         

quote:

---

This is a feminist invention? Twisting the meaning of an obvious insult to convince one's self that it is in any way complimentary actually sounds like a lack of self-esteem. Hardly empowerment; it seems more like the self-defense mechanism of delusion.

---

However, I do understand the feeling complimented when a jerky guy says that because it is like an affirmation, that he is a jerk, you got away clean, he resents the missed opportunity to abuse you within the confines of a relationship and the affirmation is him attempting to abusing you however he can because he thinks or feels on some level that you have seen through him...he doesn't like that. He can't control you and he has let you know that by calling you a name. I've even had someone throw something at me.
I think that most men have no idea the kind of abuse women can be subject to just because they are not inclined to get involved.

posted February 27, 2007 07:09 PM         

Well, all of my friends are convinced that I would not be happy in a marriage that was not intellectually stimulating, so, you are probably right, although I still think it could be a workable dynamic for some people. I agree that, if "getting off" was the point of seeing a prostitute, the same could be accomplished by masterbating. But I think more is accomplished, which is probably why people pay to see a prostitute, rather than just spend an envening at home with their faithful mistress, "Palmela Handerson". Sex is a natural requirement for persoanl happiness. It is more important to some people than others, but I do not think this is always a sign of spiritual development. I also do not think that repressing this requirement, or finding ways to channel it (which are often rife with over-compensation) is a sign of maturity. When this energy exchange is not saturated with stigma, I think it has the potential to be very healing for all concerned. Unfortuneately, most people cannot think of these things without attaching a ton of stigma to them, so, there is not even a possibility about speculating about sex outside of (the arbitrary context of) marriage as something which might exist independently of stigma, and the negative energy of stigma (with which sex is, in most eyes, saturated). But the fact of the matter is that there is no clear standard for all human beings, and there is not even one for men and women. It seems that men are far less emotionally invested in the experience, and I think men would be far more likely to understand the analogy of sex and conversation. Perhaps a woman who related to my analogy would be more likely to be depraved and immature, than a man. Perhaps she is more likely to be, in some sense, perverting her nature. I think, for a man, sex with one person is more likely to feel unnatural. Should he have to choose between sacrficing the hope of ever having a committed relationship and sacrificing the hope of ever making love to another person? Or might he perhaps find a mate who is open-minded, self-assured (so that the problem of her own insecurity is not projected outward; and interpreted as the problem of his alleged immaturity), tolerant, and understanding enough to appreciate his condition and make reasonable allowances for it? I think its possible, and probably much more common than we know.

posted February 27, 2007 07:27 PM         

we are not animals

Man should learn to control himSelf...

Respect...

are you seriously saying
that is a woman's insecurity?

posted February 28, 2007 05:08 PM         

Heart--Shaped Cross
You are trippin' Are you yanking my chain??? I am quite sure that this ultra-important <(non-sarcastic wording) requirement for sex can be fulfilled within a relationship. You sound as though you are making a case for open-marriages, which I won't knock because to each, her or his own and it will never have anything to do with me anyway (open-marriages).

I think that the meat of this issue now is one's "perception" of the energies that are involved in the sexual act. "It is all well and good" to go out and screw down the place if you so choose, but do you think that it is right and healthy to bring outside "sexual" energy into a spouse when you have tied your life, fate, karma, energy, etc. to them?
The question is, if you don't mind, What is your idea of what takes place with energy during the sex act? I quite agree with you that sex is a natural requirement for personal happiness, but why must one go and get married and then decide to be with prostitutes or other women "to help his marriage because he needs the happiness that can be found through the sex act". It has nothing to do with self-assurance/insecurity etc. when one does not want their mate to sleep with others, it has to do with much much more such as: a concentration of two peoples' energies and allowing these energies to grow into a a third power...unencumered by the energy of prostitutes. Not to mention the fact that; who wants their personal property to be handled by others??? No one, that's who. And there is a question of hurting the other persons pride by spreading their personal lovin' all over the damn place. Incidentally, there are women who sexually target men who are attached so that they can be victorious over the woman, in other words they are using the man as a tool to "win" victory over the other woman. So this hypothetical man has just allowed some other woman to use his wife's personal property (him) as a weapon against her...NICE. That is a hell of a blow. Woman or man insecure or Fort Knocks (not respectively) that sh*t hurts; pride, feelings, ego, trust, all of that.

I think that you are having fun with me and I wish you wouldn't. You are not telling me what you truly think in specifics and I want to know. Unless, of course, you are not sharing because you do not want to share a part of yourself because it would be offensive to your mate, in which case...okay.

I am not referring to societal stigmas and norms and expectations.

quote:

---

It seems that men are far less emotionally invested in the experience,...

---

FYI: Women are capable of just as much passion and need for sex as a man and quite as capable of having sex with multiple partners without being emotionally invested and I will tell you this: Try to tell a man that you have been with someone else, "but it didn't mean anything", Jesus Christ, there is a scene that you do not want to witness. And he most likely will not get over it anytime soon, if at all, why? because it is more than just the sex act, and men know this whether they want to admit it or not. There is a certain level of weakness and immaturity when someone cannot handle ascending the spiritual and emotional heights that can be achieved when invested in a monogomas(sp) relationship. It is not about repressing it is about freedom, which you cannot have when leaving your love, to cavort with prostitutes, who may have sex down to a science and art form and through these developed faculties be able to take you to heights which you have not even dreamed of, though this is not likely in this day and age. A prostitute in this day probably wouldn't have the discipline to pursue her "degree" in sex; and still, even if she was and she did, it would barely be comparable, if at all, to the ecstasy that can be achieved when only sharing your sexual energy with one person.
Well, what do you think about that???

posted February 28, 2007 05:37 PM         

However, there is a time to get rid of the extras and begin the partnered Ascent or something like that. Which is fun and exciting and ecstatic, I am sure. Whoever you make your spouse should be the sexiest thing that you have ever seen so why should you want to go elsewhere? Marriage/monogomas life partnership should be the most sexually exciting experience you could ever have. YOu may now spend your entire lifetime partaking of the juiciest you have ever seen AND you have Love to boot.

**off to take cold shower.

posted February 28, 2007 06:38 PM         

Hi. I enjoyed reading your responses. You may be right. I don't really know. I am just speculating. Maybe you do have the experience, and the bird's eye view, to judge all of this definitively. I don't know. I am happy to see that my thoughts excited you, and got you thinking about your own point of view. I do not think of my significant other as personal property, so, we seem to differ on that, and on several points which appear to follow from that. I am no expert on spiritual and sexual energies, and how they impact us directly or indirectly. Again, I have just been speculating on what appears relatively possible to me, with my limited amount of knowledge. I dont tend to find very many things impossible, and it seems possible to me to find an open relationship where some needs are met by one individual, and some are met by another. I really do not think this is absurd or beyond the capacities of mortals to accustom themselves to. I understand that it is a subtle and delicate issue. I just think it is highly possible that monogomous love may not be the instrinsically natural and healthy norm for every single individual in our species, and at every successive stage of its evolutionary development. Is that so unreasonable a speculation?