Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
"Slutty girl" - My definition
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
blatantrereg wrote: »Not everybody thinks with their genitals. Thinking with their genitals doesn't mean someone is liberated.
It makes them easily manipulated. It means they bond and have kids with people based only on physical attraction, regardless of whether the partner has anything else going, or is even a remotely decent person. It lets them form and stay in relationships with abusive people. It makes them high risk for unplanned pregnancy and for disease. It makes them flakey and unreliable.
Your dismissal of anyone who disagrees with you as just being jealous is a bit ridiculous too. I've ended relationships with people who are extremely attractive physically - certainly more attractive than I am - because I didn't like aspects of their behaviour. It wasn't to do with social pressure, from the outside things looked great.
Plenty of people are deeply and genuinely repulsed by unselective or unfaithful women, and with good reason.
Just because someone enjoys sex with people they find attractive does not mean they 'think with their genitals' and choose partners on that basis
. Why would you think that?
It is just one aspect of life, to be enjoyed without outdated judgements. I really don't understand how you would think being sexually liberated makes you easily manipulated? Surely it's the opposite, it means you have sex freely with people you find attractive purely for the enjoyment of it. It doesn't mean you repress your desires unless there is some kind of emotional relationship on offer. You can enjoy sex and still be open to a fulfilling relationship.
The bit about staying in abusive relationships is just ridiculous. I think if you look in PI most of the unhappy relationships have little or no sex.0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Which women? Certainly not me. And I've never wanted to be provided for. That is a load of bitter shyte. And defend yourself all you like, but it speaks for itself.
You sound just like my wife
WARNING ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE TO FOLLOW
She's always said she never cared if a guy could provide for her. She says she doesn't want a guy to provide for her.
Naturally, when we were dating I paid for 90% of our social outings. But that was just 'dating'. Oddly enough, if you asked her, she'd tell you, 'No, no, I don't expect a man to pay for my drinks or my dinner, ask Robdude - I pay when we go out PLENTY of times' - but 'plenty' for her means about 10% of the time.
When we started living together, we split the bills 50/50. Until something else came up. Something else was always coming up. She didn't get to work a certain day, so she had to pay less. Her car broke and she couldn't pay. She was taking a class part-time and couldn't pay.
The apartment we lived in was cheap and in a bad part of town. She couldn't afford anything better and she didn't want me to provide for her - but she complained constantly about how she wanted a nicer place. She couldn't possibly get one herself though.
I wanted a house. So I got a house. She lived in it. She couldn't possibly pay half the mortgage. She just paid 'whatever'. She wasn't paying anything near half. For an entire year she paid zero per month. But if you ask her, she'll still say, 'Well, *sometimes* I couldn't pay, but most of the time I did'.
She paid no part of the deposit and not a penny of the renovations we put into it.
Now she's a student at UCD. I'm paying all of our rent. She's working on a very, very expensive degree (that pays relatively poorly). She has no money. She has no job. She still says she doesn't care if a guy can provide for her. She'll even say she doesn't *want* a guy to provide for her....while gladly accepting of all the providing I've been doing for her.
We've been together for six years now. And for the entirety of those six years, there has *always* been some external factor that she would point to to explain why she 'temporarily' couldn't contribute her 50%. And she'll tell you how she doesn't depend on me and how she went to school to get a good job so she wouldn't need a man (she has another three years before she'll even look at getting a job. She will be 32 before she is done with school and able to work a decent full-time job. For every year of her life, from birth to 32 either her parents were paying for her, or I was).
She was raised to think she shouldn't depend on a man. She was also raised to think she should pursue a career based on what she wanted to do and not what could provide the lifestyle she wanted. And she was raised to expect a certain lifestyle she can't maintain with her career goals because they prioritize doing what she loves and not making money. It's like she's unable or unwilling to see the contradiction.
So, while she will acknowledge any individual specific thing I've done for her; she'll still maintain that 'over all' she doesn't depend on me. Which makes absolutely no sense. She will sometimes even say it as a mater of pride, almost boastfully.
I don't know you or your situation, and I'd never try to imply that this is true of you; but I will say that I personally know quite a few women, my wife included, who will say they don't want to be provided for while actually wanting/expecting to be provided for.0 -
-
-
-
You sound just like my wife
WARNING ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE TO FOLLOW
She's always said she never cared if a guy could provide for her. She says she doesn't want a guy to provide for her.
Naturally, when we were dating I paid for 90% of our social outings. But that was just 'dating'. Oddly enough, if you asked her, she'd tell you, 'No, no, I don't expect a man to pay for my drinks or my dinner, ask Robdude - I pay when we go out PLENTY of times' - but 'plenty' for her means about 10% of the time.
When we started living together, we split the bills 50/50. Until something else came up. Something else was always coming up. She didn't get to work a certain day, so she had to pay less. Her car broke and she couldn't pay. She was taking a class part-time and couldn't pay.
The apartment we lived in was cheap and in a bad part of town. She couldn't afford anything better and she didn't want me to provide for her - but she complained constantly about how she wanted a nicer place. She couldn't possibly get one herself though.
I wanted a house. So I got a house. She lived in it. She couldn't possibly pay half the mortgage. She just paid 'whatever'. She wasn't paying anything near half. For an entire year she paid zero per month. But if you ask her, she'll still say, 'Well, *sometimes* I couldn't pay, but most of the time I did'.
She paid no part of the deposit and not a penny of the renovations we put into it.
Now she's a student at UCD. I'm paying all of our rent. She's working on a fancy medical degree. She has no money. She has no job. She still says she doesn't care if a guy can provide for her. She'll even say she doesn't *want* a guy to provide for her....while gladly accepting of all the providing I've been doing for her.
We've been together for six years now. And for the entirety of those six years, there has *always* been some external factor that she would point to to explain why she 'temporarily' couldn't contribute her 50%. And she'll tell you how she doesn't depend on me and how she went to school to get a good job so she wouldn't need a man (she has another three years before she'll even look at getting a job).
She was raised to think she shouldn't depend on a man. She was also raised to think she should pursue a career based on what she wanted to do and not what could provide the lifestyle she wanted. And she was raised to expect a certain lifestyle she can't maintain with her career goals because they prioritize doing what she loves and not making money. It's like she's unable or unwilling to see the contradiction.
So, while she will acknowledge any individual specific thing I've done for her; she'll still maintain that 'over all' she doesn't depend on me. Which makes absolutely no sense. She will sometimes even say it as a mater of pride, almost boastfully.
I don't know you or your situation, and I'd never try to imply that this is true of you; but I will say that I personally know quite a few women, my wife included, who will say they don't want to be provided for while actually wanting/expecting to be provided for.
If you're that fucking bitter about it will you ever do her a favour and end it.0 -
-
-
-
Yep, anecdotal.Which women? Certainly not me. And I've never wanted to be provided for. That is a load of bitter shyte. And defend yourself all you like, but it speaks for itself.
You sound just like my wife
WARNING ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE TO FOLLOW
She's always said she never cared if a guy could provide for her. She says she doesn't want a guy to provide for her.
Naturally, when we were dating I paid for 90% of our social outings. But that was just 'dating'. Oddly enough, if you asked her, she'd tell you, 'No, no, I don't expect a man to pay for my drinks or my dinner, ask Robdude - I pay when we go out PLENTY of times' - but 'plenty' for her means about 10% of the time.
When we started living together, we split the bills 50/50. Until something else came up. Something else was always coming up. She didn't get to work a certain day, so she had to pay less. Her car broke and she couldn't pay. She was taking a class part-time and couldn't pay.
The apartment we lived in was cheap and in a bad part of town. She couldn't afford anything better and she didn't want me to provide for her - but she complained constantly about how she wanted a nicer place. She couldn't possibly get one herself though.
I wanted a house. So I got a house. She lived in it. She couldn't possibly pay half the mortgage. She just paid 'whatever'. She wasn't paying anything near half. For an entire year she paid zero per month. But if you ask her, she'll still say, 'Well, *sometimes* I couldn't pay, but most of the time I did'.
She paid no part of the deposit and not a penny of the renovations we put into it.
Now she's a student at UCD. I'm paying all of our rent. She's working on a very, very expensive degree (that pays relatively poorly). She has no money. She has no job. She still says she doesn't care if a guy can provide for her. She'll even say she doesn't *want* a guy to provide for her....while gladly accepting of all the providing I've been doing for her.
We've been together for six years now. And for the entirety of those six years, there has *always* been some external factor that she would point to to explain why she 'temporarily' couldn't contribute her 50%. And she'll tell you how she doesn't depend on me and how she went to school to get a good job so she wouldn't need a man (she has another three years before she'll even look at getting a job. She will be 32 before she is done with school and able to work a decent full-time job. For every year of her life, from birth to 32 either her parents were paying for her, or I was).
She was raised to think she shouldn't depend on a man. She was also raised to think she should pursue a career based on what she wanted to do and not what could provide the lifestyle she wanted. And she was raised to expect a certain lifestyle she can't maintain with her career goals because they prioritize doing what she loves and not making money. It's like she's unable or unwilling to see the contradiction.
So, while she will acknowledge any individual specific thing I've done for her; she'll still maintain that 'over all' she doesn't depend on me. Which makes absolutely no sense. She will sometimes even say it as a mater of pride, almost boastfully.
I don't know you or your situation, and I'd never try to imply that this is true of you; but I will say that I personally know quite a few women, my wife included, who will say they don't want to be provided for while actually wanting/expecting to be provided for.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
blatantrereg wrote: »Not everybody thinks with their genitals. Thinking with their genitals doesn't mean someone is liberated.
It makes them easily manipulated. It means they bond and have kids with people based only on physical attraction, regardless of whether the partner has anything else going, or is even a remotely decent person. It lets them form and stay in relationships with abusive people. It makes them high risk for unplanned pregnancy and for disease. It makes them flakey and unreliable.
Your dismissal of anyone who disagrees with you as just being jealous is a bit ridiculous too. I've ended relationships with people who are extremely attractive physically - certainly more attractive than I am - because I didn't like aspects of their behaviour. It wasn't to do with social pressure, from the outside things looked great.
Plenty of people are deeply and genuinely repulsed by unselective or unfaithful women, and with good reason.I never said anything about being un-selective though. A girl can selective and still F around a lot. Like, she may only go for 1 in 20 guys, but that means that in a city of 100 k people there will be loads of guys she will be open to.Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »Why do you think sluts ate unselective?
You can have sex with numerous people and be selective about each one by only having sex with people you find attractive.
How exactly is a slut easily manipulated? A perfectly normal high self esteem woman can sleep around and not be manipulated.
Why are you assuming that sluts can only bond and have kids based on physical attraction, sluts are people too who value more than just appearance.
Why would a slut stay in an abusive relationship more than a non slut?daisybelle2008 wrote: »Just because someone enjoys sex with people they find attractive does not mean they 'think with their genitals' and choose partners on that basis
. Why would you think that?
It is just one aspect of life, to be enjoyed without outdated judgements. I really don't understand how you would think being sexually liberated makes you easily manipulated? Surely it's the opposite, it means you have sex freely with people you find attractive purely for the enjoyment of it. It doesn't mean you repress your desires unless there is some kind of emotional relationship on offer. You can enjoy sex and still be open to a fulfilling relationship.
The bit about staying in abusive relationships is just ridiculous. I think if you look in PI most of the unhappy relationships have little or no sex.
My post was talking about what the term slut means to me. I stand by everything I said in it. The disagreements here come down to semantics really.
The bit about staying in abusive relationships isn't ridiculous. Plenty of people stay in bad situations because they think with their groin.
Glorification of promiscuity or painting it as some sort of display of independence or liberation is misguided.0 -
-
-
Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement