The old say goes Hell Hath No Fury Like A Woman Scorned

Post Reply New Topic

Well usually men are after women's bodies at first and if they feel bonded enough, the man sticks around and has a "relationship" or what the woman thinks is a relationship. It begins as sexual attraction with men.

Agree with pretty much everything you've said here. And EXCELLENT point about men being guardians rather than taskmasters. That's an easy point for some of us to forget.

The taskmaster role can't be completely ignored, either, though. It's just that the effectiveness of a man as taskmaster-in-chief is going to depend on the wisdom a man has for SHARING responsibilities. If, hypothetically I were to say, "Woman, get this house clean," for ME that would mean I was handing the responsibility for cleaning the house to my wife, which would in turn mean I was deferring to HER as to the specifics of how the job got done. Which would mean I'd have to accept that she might put me to work on a specific task! I mean, she could conceivably sit on the couch and play video games while I end up on my knees scrubbing baseboards with an old toothbrush.

Again, this is hypothetical and has to do with how I see family leadership, not about "you're the woman, now clean the house yourself." My wife is brilliant, and my being the leader means recognizing individual strengths and having the humility to lean on others when I'm unable to act alone. A good boss stresses teamwork and utilizing the individual talents of his team. I'm not afforded the luxury of being self-centered and imposing my will on others for the sake of my own comfort and convenience. I also see the future roles of my children as leaders in their own right, and how they turn out is going to depend on the example I show them.

No offense taken in regards to my dad…yes, he did have his good points, but the bad points vastly overshadowed the good, as bad points too often do. He was very sick and weak towards the end of his life, so mom seemed to stick around because she knew he couldn't hurt her. And by then there was little point in trying to leave. All things considered, she took really good care of him, and years of disease and bad habits finally caught up with him. My dad lost any respect I had for him once he started letting all that get to him, I mean, he just gave up. So, he was all mean and nasty without ANY kind of redeeming qualities. I'm pretty tough on my oldest two kids and resemble my dad in some ways, but at least I'm actively teaching them who I am underneath, what really drives me, and WHY I'm so gruff and/or passionate about everything I do and in correcting them. I think I might have come to an understanding of my dad if he'd lived long enough for me to become an adult (I was 14 when he died). It's just hard to remember the good qualities of someone when your last memories of them happened in the midst of the hormonal firestorm that defines the early teen years…that's the worst possible time, I think, to antagonize a kid. If you have to be a jerk, be a jerk when we're still young enough to be forgiving and spend the rest of the time helping us understand you. Don't just expect us to revolve around you when we're becoming what we're going to be when we grow up.

For me men are neither guardians or task makers, lol. Why would men be guardians? Men should actually be guardians of their own impulses. We all should. Govern thyself first of all and no others shall ye need guard.

Because.....we're the ones with the penises!

^^^^^so if you're a guardian,and you have to protect your mate,how do you plan on doing it with your penis?Threaten an intruder with it??

Just don't flash anyone.

Here's how things will go.

1. Woman gets attacked by an evildoer.

2. Man hits the evildoer as hard as he can. With his penis.

3. Man curls up in a ball screaming "Oh my God, my penis!"

I have much more respect for women who refuse to pursue sexual relations until they're married, because it means only the best man for her gets the prize. Outside of the marriage covenant, men and women both defeat themselves by having multiple partners through the years; its the whole "duct tape" example.

the problem with THIS premise is men love gooing out with all of the womyn they consider whores for 20-30 years until they actually feel like setting down, then who is left as a "virgin" for them to marry.

Why does the man get to do anything HE wants any time HE wants but womyn have to sit around the house and wait? Can't have your cake and eat it too.

want a virgin - you be one also! I don't believe in double standards for anything.

What is the "duct tape" example about?

The focus of this thread in particular is women, though. I suspect Moviefan2k4 would say the same thing for men if that's what we were discussing. After all, look at what he wrote a bit more carefully: He says "men and women BOTH defeat themselves by having multiple partners…" It's not a double standard.

I don't believe in double standards for anything, either. I lost my virginity, as did the girl I was with at the time, because we'd been together for YEARS by that point and intimate contact was nothing new. I warned her to stop (sparing the details here), she didn't, and I don't think she really understood what was happening to her until it was already too late.

I dunno, I think our culture makes too much of virginity such that it's more of a burden than it is a blessing. I also think that the value of virginity runs contrary to other values that stress waiting an unreasonable amount of time before men and women can get married. There will be a moral conflict for as long as culture places undue emphasis on advanced education and career building over and above marriage and family. There's nothing wrong with education and career building, but the way I see it marriage and family are MORE important, and the only way you're going to get marriages that LAST by letting kids marry young is by continued family support on both sides while young couples complete educational and career goals TOGETHER. Keep things as screwed up as they are and you're NOT going to get boys and girls waiting for each other.

I don't buy into the whole "it's ok for men to be men, but women have to be virgins" line of thinking. I don't think most men really want virgins. Speaking from experience, I think virgins are an acquired taste, having deflowered 4 of them. The absolute worst experience was this virgin who was about into it as a dead fish. My favorite was a real firecracker, which was cool because she'd never even had a boyfriend before, never kissed a guy…NOTHING, and I remember asking her a few times if she was sure she was a virgin. The other was the best friend of my then-girlfriend (who encouraged it). She'd been engaged to this guy and was "saving herself" for him. He suddenly just vanished off the face of the earth, and some time later he "came out." I think maybe I've just been lucky that 3/4 were positive experiences, and that probably a lot of it is more like the 1 dead fish. If you're just looking for fun, you're either looking for someone who is so sick and tired of being a virgin or someone who knows what she's doing and really gets into sex. Not every guy cares if the girl gets off on it, but for me, at least, it's more satisfying if she does get into it than if she's just faking it (or is too busy freaking out over it to enjoy it, or whatever the case may be).

Incidentally, the moral preference for virginity isn't really rooted in anything practical in the modern day context. It originated in a time when women were seen more as property. When a man died without children, particularly male children, he was considered DEAD…whereas he could live on through male children, so he wasn't completely dead-dead. Because it was important that a man's name live on after him through male children, he had to have the assurance that his wife's children really were his, and the only way in the ancient world for this to work was if the wife was verifiably a virgin on her wedding night. More often this could be proven after the fact, and it was expected soon after she'd bear children. Obviously, there is a down side to this: after the wedding night, a woman could have sex with whoever she wanted, and no one would ever know unless she was caught in the act. Because of the obvious attempt on the husband's life by casting doubt on his progeny, both the woman and the man she cheated with would have to be put to death--hopefully something that would discourage cheating. But, anyway, that's the whole point of waiting for marriage.

We don't have the stigma of wondering who the baby-daddy is, since we can test for that in ways the ancient world could not. I still think that sexual purity is a virtue and ideal--just not always realistic given current attitudes. The cure for lost virginity is to simply just not have sex anymore, or if a relationship results in long-term monogamy, the couple should get married as soon as reasonably possible before kids come into the picture. Even if you carefully read the Old Testament Bible, sex with an unmarried, unbetrothed woman isn't a punishable sin…it's merely "frowned upon." The couple simply has to get married, with the man forfeiting any rights he has to a divorce later on. After all, if they love each other, what's the problem? The only real value of virginity in the present day is that a person's body belongs to his or her mate. However, I believe that love for another person is more important than physical status or sexual activity. My wife wasn't a virgin the first time we had sex, and we've had a much more successful marriage than we ever would have with anyone else. No, we didn't do ourselves any favors having multiple partners, but we are the best life-partners all the same.

One last thing on virginity: There is nothing quite like having a new intimate partner. As I said, my wife was not my first, nor I hers, but our first time together was still OUR first time. Virgins or not, that's not something to be ignored. When we got engaged, we promised that there wouldn't be anyone else, and that hasn't changed. I think that's a lot more important than absolute sexual purity.

***Note: None of this excuses sexual impropriety. However, human beings are built with perfectly reasonable desire for sexual intimacy. While there's no excuse for it, we don't do kids any favors by making them wait over 1/4 of their life before they can get married and be intimate the first time. Either we rethink all the unreasonable educational/career hoops we make them jump through and remove obstacles to marriage and family, or we approach them with kindness and understanding after we've set them up for failure. I think our expectations for our kids are WAY out of hand. If sexual purity really is that important to us, it's going to require sacrifices from other areas of life that we've grossly overblown the value of. And I admire anyone who has the courage to take that kind of stand.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-q0nmbD5yY[/youtube]

When you apply a piece of duct tape to a surface for the first time, it sticks very firmly to that surface. Removing it is possible, but some of the glue is left behind. As that same piece is re-fused to many surfaces, a point is reached where it will no longer bond to anything. Because they're so inherently personal, sexual relationships follow a very similar pattern. When two virgins have sex for the first time, it establishes a very strong emotional, psychological, and spiritual bond between them. If that bond is broken, healing can occur, but no other relationship will have the same level of intensity as the beginning. When men and women have multiple partners in their lives, their odds of bonding beyond the physical alone drop very quickly...and if nothing changes, they will lose that ability for good.

funny, not my experience

had several relationships, and many casual flings before my last relationship which was actually the closest and best one - the reason - we just had better communication, sex is just sex, mucus membranes rubbing, you CAN use it for a emotional bonding BUT it does not HAVE to be

The phrase "its just sex" is a bold-faced lie, and sadly one that American culture has accepted like crazy. Anyone who denies the non-physical components is either lying to themselves, or their senses have been dulled in that regard through multiple partners or sexual trauma.

to each his or her own