AH Shocker: Morally Ambiguous Boardsies

Oriel

Dudess wrote: »

if you just get a poke by an inexperienced young lad in your clenched vadge

Classy bird.

AARRRGH

BTW Boston, aren't you gay? I would have thought you would have known what it feels like to be judged based on a sexual act.

Lots of men think gays are disgusting because of the sex they have. Should gays expect to be beaten up because of this?

Boston

Susannahmia wrote: »

So we should just accept things the way they are and not try to change them because "that's just life"? It's wrong but ultimately something one should just accept? You are contradicting yourself at every chance.

No we should go through like expect the exact opposite of what is likely to happen, that way every day is a surprise. Live in the real world much?

You have to accept that people will act in a certain way in general, that doesn't mean you have to act in that way.

Dudess

Oriel wrote: »

Classy bird.

There are lots of classy blokes here too.

C'mon Sonnenblumen! Don't tease me, at least back up your statement! Otherwise I'm just gonna have to assume that you think rich kids use protection - because rich is respectable. And poor kids don't - because poor is irresponsible. But you wouldn't think things like that now... would you?

Iago

Dudess wrote: »

To be fair, there are those rough wans in their tracksuits and chunky gold jewellery who'll have it lobbed in any orifice down a side alley and they don't strike me as particularly vulnerable or insecure. They strike me as damn confident actually. But guys, while disgusted by them, will still have sex with them - which to me, demonstrates a lack of self respect and dignity on the guy's part; the fact that he's so unfussy he's willing to stick it into a girl who's that nasty.

And he no doubt knows it, so he tries to compensate for it by laughing at her behind her back to his mates and calling her a slapper...

you have serious class issues.

I know plenty of not so rough wans in their gucci shoes and expensive clothes who'll have it lobbed in any orifice down a side alley, or in wesley or bective, or in their mates house when the parents are away and there are a dozen or so people around and a variety of other places to boot.

Nevyn

Rich kids have enough pocket money to buy condoms or to go to the ifpa clinc and go on the pill iwth out having to ask mammy and daddy for extra money to add to their allowances.

Boston

dublindude wrote: »

BTW Boston, aren't you gay? I would have thought you would have known what it feels like to be judged based on a sexual act.

Lots of men think gays are disgusting because of the sex they have. Should gays expect to be beaten up because of this?

I'm bi-sexual. My views on sex are far more liberal then I think either yourself or dubes give me credit for, and I'd personally wouldn't judge someone based on there sexual activity. I've known some lovely people whose lifes have been destroyed by their inability to control their sexual impulses. But yes, I know what its like for people to think that all you are is who you have have sex with. Its somewhat expected at this stage, even you have made assumptions.

As for expecting to be beaten up, in certain situations you can expect that, yes. Thats the real, nasty world we live in.

Dudess

Iago wrote: »

you have serious class issues.

I know plenty of not so rough wans in their gucci shoes and expensive clothes who'll have it lobbed in any orifice down a side alley, or in wesley or bective, or in their mates house when the parents are away and there are a dozen or so people around and a variety of other places to boot.

Oh undoubtedly. Sorry, should have mentioned those silly eejits.

When you say I have serious class issues, do you mean I look down on people from poor areas? If you're just going by the post in question then I'll make an assumption that you do. But otherwise you'd have seen a post of mine quoted by Sonnenblumen just a small bit further back - where I say that there's no guarantee rich kids use protection or don't have sex at a crazily young age. It was in response to people commenting that the Ballymuners are out in full force (regarding all the under-age sex stories).
There's a thread on fee-paying schools here where Sonnenblumen has made it abundantly clear that he considers rich people better than poor people, and more likely to be respectable etc. That's what I was referring to in my response to his rather bald statement.

SimpleSam06

Dudess wrote: »

Oh offensive comments are punishable. If you're cool about what Mairt said, fine. Anyone with a bit of sense however would be disgusted by it.

+1

Davei141 wrote: »

A threat of a ban over a story Because its "offensive" to her is crap. Everything on AH is offensive to somebody.

The post was probably reported, and Dudess was doing her (unpaid and thankless) job as a moderator in dealing with it.

rb_ie wrote: »

She is a slapper, plain and simple.

It's not, it's simply targetted at slappers who go down on their knees to random men in filthy cubicles in club bathrooms.

Hold on a second. Are you saying you wouldn't mumble sweet nothings at the holiest of holies if it was a hot female bouncer, and be voted man of the hour by your mates for doing so? Bit of a double standard being applied here.

Mairt wrote: »

But ya know, your past makes you what you are now. At least if you learn from your mistakes, but most of you here are either too young to recognise your mistakes or have yet to make them.

Funny you didn't think of that before you posted up your little story.

Davei141

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

Bit of a double standard being applied here.

NOWAY!...welcome to the real world.

Dudess

But I can't help but infer from cop-out remarks like that that we just have to shrug our shoulders and put up with it...

Davei141

Good luck on changing the worlds double standards.

Dudess

Well Christ, at least I'm trying to get people to think about them, instead of just accepting them and thus contributing to the reinforcement of them...

Baudelaire

On another occasion was not really caught but my first Long term girlfriend and myself used to ride in a tree house. The said tree house was built by an architect down the back of his rather large back garden. It had stairs and everything. Anyway after a few weeks of going at it and fireing the used condoms out the window of the tree house we had no idea that some had stuck to the branches of the trees around the tree house. One night when we arrived to use said tree house we find that the owner had
taken a chain saw to the steps up to it so we could not frequent our
love shack.

So wait, you broke into someone elses property, used their tree house (which if I'm not mistaken treehouses are usually built for kids) to have sex and then threw used condoms into their garden (where said kids might also be playing) and people have the cheek to hassle Dudess because she finds that offensive, I agree with her, thats the scummiest thing I've ever heard. I assume it never dawned on any of you that are saying "everyones done it" that these used condoms don't just disolve when the sun comes up. I'm disgusted that people would find disposing of a used condom like that in any way acceptable. It looks to me like you're own sperm isn't good enough to be held in your pocket until you find a suitable way to dispose of it but is good enough to be thrown on the streets for any kid to find :mad:

Dudess

But Baudelaire... it's COOL!!! And ya just GOTTA boast about it!

Toots

I agree with Dudess and Baudelaire. There's not many things that really grind my gears, but this is one of them. The local park in front of my parent's house has been littered with used condoms and cans in recent times, and it's just disgusting. The latest horrible thing I've seen there is a load of used condoms tied to a mesh fence where the park connects to a field near some bushes. :eek: Carelessly discarding a condom after using it is bad enough, but to deliberately tie one to a fence or tree in a public place??? Not wanting to sound like an ould wan, but what is wrong with kids today??:mad:

Nevyn

Davei141 wrote: »

Good luck on changing the worlds double standards.

Why thank you for your well wishing and support.
Wanna help ?

Dudess

Heh, you were born in '85, you're only a kid yourself!

Meh, certain people have always been obnoxious and disrespectful when engaging in the sexual act - it's not a new thing.

Davei141

Dudess wrote: »

Well Christ, at least I'm trying to get people to think about them, instead of just accepting them and thus contributing to the reinforcement of them...

You can think your doing something all you want, all you are is complaining in a thread that was supposed to be a laugh.

Baudelaire wrote:

So wait, you broke into someone elses property, used their tree house (which if I'm not mistaken treehouses are usually built for kids) to have sex and then threw used condoms into their garden (where said kids might also be playing) and people have the cheek to hassle Dudess because she finds that offensive, I agree with her, thats the scummiest thing I've ever heard. I assume it never dawned on any of you that are saying "everyones done it" that these used condoms don't just disolve when the sun comes up. I'm disgusted that people would find disposing of a used condom like that in any way acceptable. It looks to me like you're own sperm isn't good enough to be held in your pocket until you find a suitable way to dispose of it but is good enough to be thrown on the streets for any kid to find

Ya hear that! should be ashamed of yerselves! that will be 10 hail marys please

AARRRGH

Things are getting better though.

Slowly, slowly...

Boston

The only double standard which seems to be bad is the one where women are on the loosing end. Earlier someone mentioned that if mairt was straight it was a terrible thing to do, and if he was gay it was an odd thing to do.

As another point, women use terms like slut and whore ect far more extensively then men.

Davei141

Thaedydal wrote: »

Why thank you for your well wishing and support.
Wanna help ?

I might help if you could enlighten me as to what double standards you would like to tackle. Besides the one in this thread of course.

Boston wrote:

The only double standard which seems to be bad is the one where women are on the loosing end. Earlier someone mentioned that if mairt was straight it was a terrible thing to do, and if he was gay it was an odd thing to do.

As another point, women use terms like slut and whore ect far more extensively then men.

Bang on the money.

Dudess

Davei141 wrote: »

You can think your doing something all you want, all you are is complaining in a thread that was supposed to be a laugh.

Meh, you're just itching for an argument. Whatever.

Ya hear that! should be ashamed of yerselves! that will be 10 hail marys please

Ah that's just trolling of a most pathetic kind. You KNOW she's right and that there's nothing goody-two-shoes about it. And obviously you'd be enraged if someone treated your property in that manner, but you just want to argue and swim against the tide for the sake of it so you treat it as her being all holy joe... Aw...

Boston wrote: »

As another point, women use terms like slut and whore ect far more extensively then men.

Absolutely without a shadow of a doubt. There are certain women whose attitudes do not help other women one little bit.

fits

Boston wrote: »

As another point, women use terms like slut and whore ect far more extensively then men.

woohoo, another generalisation!

I dont agree, I havent heard those terms from a female in years (school).

Nevyn

Davei141 wrote: »

I might help if you could enlighten me as to what double standards you would like to tackle. Besides the one in this thread of course.

Well I believe that you will work to wards elminating double standard if they ones you disagree with personally, so what ones to you dislike ?

Toots

Dudess wrote: »

Heh, you were born in '85, you're only a kid yourself!

Legally I'm an adult!:p In all seriousness though, it's not 22 year olds that are up to these shenanigans in the park. I'd be a granny compared to most of them.:o

SimpleSam06

Davei141 wrote: »

NOWAY!...welcome to the real world.

The real world we live in is drastically different to the one our parents lived in, especially when it comes to sexual standards.

The real world our children will grow up in will have drastically different standards for sexual behaviour to our own, and ones we would probably find shocking.

Thats the real world.

Dudess

I'm nearly 30, that would make me a great great granny compared to them so! Scary how young some of them are though - and really sad. Christ, there's most of your life for being all worldly and jaded.

fits wrote: »

woohoo, another generalisation!

I dont agree, I havent heard those terms from a female in years (school).

Have to say I hear that sh*t from a LOT of females - the kind of females who say stuff like "she shouldn't be wearing that short skirt at her age" (even if she has amazing legs but she's 45 so it's a no-no) or "if you're single in your 30s you'll never find a man" etc.

Sonnenblumen

Dudess wrote: »

Oh undoubtedly. Sorry, should have mentioned those silly eejits.

When you say I have serious class issues, do you mean I look down on people from poor areas? If you're just going by the post in question then I'll make an assumption that you do. But otherwise you'd have seen a post of mine quoted by Sonnenblumen just a small bit further back - where I say that there's no guarantee rich kids use protection or don't have sex at a crazily young age. It was in response to people commenting that the Ballymuners are out in full force (regarding all the under-age sex stories).
There's a thread on fee-paying schools here where Sonnenblumen has made it abundantly clear that he considers rich people better than poor people, and more likely to be respectable etc. That's what I was referring to in my response to his rather bald statement.

It's abundantly clear to me, despite the apparent crude humour and tried and tested prejudice here, that some people no matter how much time in whatever school they attended have little to show for it.

Step aside for a moment from your aimless flag flying and reflect on what you say and not be pre-occupied with how you wish they see you.

Davei141

Dudess wrote: »

Ah that's just trolling of a most pathetic kind. You KNOW she's right and that there's nothing goody-two-shoes about it. And obviously you'd be enraged if someone treated your property in that manner, but you just want to argue and swim against the tide for the sake of it so you treat it as her being all holy joe... Aw...

I was just taking the piss out of how angry people get over things on this, you would swear the guy threw the condom at her/his head. People need to relax in here.

Absolutely without a shadow of a doubt. There are certain women whose attitudes do not help other women one little bit.

true

fits wrote: »

woohoo, another generalisation!

I dont agree, I havent heard those terms from a female in years (school).

You wouldnt happen to live on the aran islands by any chance?

Thaedydal wrote: »

Well I believe that you will work to wards elminating double standard if they ones you disagree with personally, so what ones to you dislike ?

I would like to hear what you would have to say on the matter, i dont really let any of them bother me. Do you get bothered by any others thats not in this thread or related to it?

fits

Dudess wrote: »

Have to say I hear that sh*t from a LOT of females - the kind of females who say stuff like "she shouldn't be wearing that short skirt at her age" (even if she has amazing legs but she's 45 so it's a no-no) or "if you're single in your 30s you'll never find a man" etc.

Really! I'm not lying, I really dont hear that sort of talk at all. I guess the only women I interact with are my friends and family who are all cool (I dont meet any at work).

Davei141

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

The real world our children will grow up in will have drastically different standards for sexual behaviour to our own, and ones we would probably find shocking.

Thats the real world.

I think you will find thats the future world.

fits

Davei141 wrote: »

You wouldnt happen to live on the aran islands by any chance?
?

I suppose its not dissimilar

Toots

Dudess wrote: »

I'm nearly 30, that would make me a great great granny compared to them so! Scary how young some of them are though - and really sad. Christ, there's most of your life for being all worldly and jaded

It is sad really. I was the oldest in my group to sleep with someone (just shy of 18) most of them did it at 16 or just gone 17 and I thought that was really young. On friday evening in work there was two girls from a local school in getting money and they were chatting away about how one of them was going to have sex with her BF that weekend as his rents were away. When I was verifying her, I asked her date of birth and she was only 13.:(

togster

Im not going to name names or whatever and it is a pretty idiotic thing to take it to ffedback but this thread was supposed to be a bit of fun and i don't see why it had to turn into a debate about moralls, surely that belongs in a different forum. And WTF is up with changing thread titles and stuff. Its really noones business what someone does or does not do.

Will someone please think of the children for god sake.

Dudess

As I said, blame the posters who chose to be obnoxious. It wasn't fun at all - it was ugly. There were some funny moments posted but there was also horrible disrespectful sh1t. And there's still a "getting caught in the act" thread.

Toots85 wrote: »

It is sad really. I was the oldest in my group to sleep with someone (just shy of 18) most of them did it at 16 or just gone 17 and I thought that was really young.

Snap!

On friday evening in work there was two girls from a local school in getting money and they were chatting away about how one of them was going to have sex with her BF that weekend as his rents were away. When I was verifying her, I asked her date of birth and she was only 13.:(

Fukked up. It's like innocence is just draining away. I'm not saying the world should be all "Waltons" - *shudder* heaven forbid! (no doubt someone will accuse me of thinking so since a lot of Boards posters tend to lose perspective). But 13 is an age for innocent curiosity regarding sex - kissing boys, holding hands, discovering what make-up looks good on you etc. It's not a time for skipping past all that and just shagging.

If I've kids I shudder to think what it'll be like for them...

togster

OK but i didn't think this was a thread about underage sex?

Dudess

Well it's come up a fair bit. And a lot of people consider it the norm (I'm talking VERY underage, not 15 or 16) which is fairly depressing. I think it's more guys than girls who consider it the norm, but really young girls still do it, and considering how a girl needs a lot of foreplay and lube before her body is even ready for penetration, they hardly enjoy it.

Susannahmia

Boston wrote: »

I left my sock puppets at home, I need them if I have to go into more detail about Real world values Vs right and wrong.

The girl didn't deserve was mairt did, but I fail to see why she should have earned respect for it.

She doesn't earn any but as a human being she deserves some.

Susannahmia

Boston wrote: »

No we should go through like expect the exact opposite of what is likely to happen, that way every day is a surprise. Live in the real world much?

You have to accept that people will act in a certain way in general, that doesn't mean you have to act in that way.

Or that you have to condone it either.

Baudelaire

Dudess wrote: »

But Baudelaire... it's COOL!!! And ya just GOTTA boast about it!

I'd wonder if it'll be as cool when their first 4 year old finds one under the slide in the local playground and brings it over to daddy to show him the chewing gum they just found, oh and it tastes ikky.

Dudess

Davei141 wrote: »

I was just taking the piss out of how angry people get over things on this, you would swear the guy threw the condom at her/his head. People need to relax in here.

Not point in trying to minimise it - it's appalling and you know it. And the blasé attitude of the guy who posted it was even worse. Oh, and the way nobody condemned it - because he was getting to have SEX so that makes it ok. And the way people accused me of being on my moral high horse. Give me a fukking break... He actually committed a crime.

Boston

Susannahmia wrote: »

Or that you have to condone it either.

I condone nothing.

Davei141

Dudess wrote: »

Not point in trying to minimise it - it's appalling and you know it. And the blasé attitude of the guy who posted it was even worse. Oh, and the way nobody condemned it - because he was getting to have SEX so that makes it ok. And the way people accused me of being on my moral high horse. Give me a fukking break... He actually committed a crime.

He threw a condom away and had sex in a tree house. Hes not Fred west.

Susannahmia

Boston wrote: »

I condone nothing.

Then why do you insist that the treatment she got was to be expected within this society . By taking this behaviour for granted and not objecting to it you are effectively enforcing it.

Nevyn

Davei141 wrote: »

I would like to hear what you would have to say on the matter, i dont really let any of them bother me. Do you get bothered by any others thats not in this thread or related to it?

Yep that would why I am an activist and an advocate for the causes I believe in.

Dudess

You're only picking bits of it. He repeatedly trespassed on the property of someone he didn't know to use the child's treehouse for sex (the child's treehouse) and fukked a condom out to wherever it would land each time.

Look, why are you trying to argue that what he did isn't wrong? Are you perhaps... in a trolling mood?

There are discussions where there is no right and there is no wrong. This is not one of them.

I'm gonna have to use the old last resort chestnut: how would you feel if someone treated your property like that - more to the point, where your kids play? And please don't say you'd be fine about it, boys will be boys etc. Because that's a lie.

SimpleSam06

Davei141 wrote: »

I think you will find thats the future world.

The point was the world as we know it is in a state of constant change. What holds true today, "the real world", is as changeable as the weather, so pointing to that as the last word doesn't hold true. Accepting that change is the only constant puts you more in touch with reality than simply waving your arms and saying "sure everyone says it".

Society is climbing out of the dreadful victorian era morality and getting more in contact with the way people really are - it has no choice, at the end of the day. I can see a time in the not so distant future when casual sex between whoever (and however many of whoever) is not only not taboo, it will be encouraged.

Yes its shocking to us, but accepted sexual behaviour nowadays would have been shocking to our parents 50 years ago.

Nerin

And please don't say you'd be fine about it, boys will be boys etc. Because that's a lie.

jesus,let him answer first!

Terry

So some people have sex in public places, some have sex while they are under age.
Some get blown in toilet cubicles and see nothing wrong in it, others don't get blown in toilet cubicles and have a problem with these acts taking place.
Some hop into their neighbours treehouse and throw used condoms into the branches, others don't and don't like to see those condoms in the trees.

Interesting stuff.

I'm off to the kitchen to put a pizza in the oven.
As I walk away from the PC,I'm going to imagine everyone chanting my name.