+- The Lurker Lounge Forums (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums)
+-- Forum: The Lurker Lounge (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The Lounge (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/forum-12.html)
+--- Thread: A Freebie Worthy of Deebye (/thread-6297.html)
A Freebie Worthy of Deebye - jahcs - 06-02-2005
Doc,Jun 2 2005, 11:21 AM Wrote:D'oh! I typoed my sausage.
[right][snapback]79394[/snapback][/right]
That is so wrong, on so many levels. :whistling:
A Freebie Worthy of Deebye - Doc - 06-02-2005
Well so are most of Occhi's jokes...
A Freebie Worthy of Deebye - Mithrandir - 06-02-2005
Casual sex is an interesting topic. The prevailing logic is that, inevitably, one of the partners gets too attached, or takes it too far, etc. and then feelings end up getting hurt and problems ensue.
If both partners *don't* get emotionally attached however, is it really "wrong" for two consenting adults to have casual fun together? It seems like many people make so much more of sex than they need to. Obviously it's best with someone who you deeply care for and are committed to, but it's nothing to sniff at when done with someone who just wants to have fun as well.
A Freebie Worthy of Deebye - Doc - 06-02-2005
Mithrandir,Jun 2 2005, 03:18 PM Wrote:Casual sex is an interesting topic. The prevailing logic is that, inevitably, one of the partners gets too attached, or takes it too far, etc. and then feelings end up getting hurt and problems ensue.
If both partners *don't* get emotionally attached however, is it really "wrong" for two consenting adults to have casual fun together? It seems like many people make so much more of sex than they need to. Obviously it's best with someone who you deeply care for and are committed to, but it's nothing to sniff at when done with someone who just wants to have fun as well.
[right][snapback]79401[/snapback][/right]
We did that. It was called the 70s. And we all know how farked up that decade was.
A Freebie Worthy of Deebye - ShadowHM - 06-02-2005
Doc,Jun 2 2005, 03:49 PM Wrote:We did that. It was called the 70s. And we all know how farked up that decade was.
[right][snapback]79405[/snapback][/right]
Speak for yourself, Doc. I sure had fun. :P
On a more serious note, Mithrandir, I see nothing 'wrong' with consenting adults having fun together. Yes, there is that problem of differing expectations and feelings. But (here comes that word again) :rolleyes: communication can mitigate or even nullify that.
A Freebie Worthy of Deebye - Doc - 06-02-2005
ShadowHM,Jun 2 2005, 04:04 PM Wrote:Speak for yourself, Doc. I sure had fun. :P
On a more serious note, Mithrandir, I see nothing 'wrong' with consenting adults having fun together. Yes, there is that problem of differing expectations and feelings. But (here comes that word again) :rolleyes: communication can mitigate or even nullify that.
[right][snapback]79406[/snapback][/right]
Heck, I had fun too...
But I got one word. Disco.
See what random sexual encounters get us?
**Shudder**
White polyester suits...
Gold medallions.
A Freebie Worthy of Deebye - Minionman - 06-02-2005
BrianLeichty35,Jun 2 2005, 11:24 AM Wrote:Who is not reading whose postings? I never said that my nieces were pregnant. What I said was that girls that are my nieces ages and Younger are getting pregnant.
As to your first point about Divorce, let me ask you a question. Why is it that people who get divorced didn't figure out that the relationship wasn't going to work before they got to the point of getting married?
[right][snapback]79356[/snapback][/right]
About the young girls (I'm guessing that's what you mean by "my niece's age") getting pregnant, why were they having sex in the first place? Did they think it was cool? Did they not want to do it but had trouble sticking up for themselves? Did other people squeeze them into doing it? Did they not understand the problems pregnancy can cause? A combination? Arguing that premartial sex causes these problems ignores a lot of other social and peopel issues that go into the decisions.
About the divorces: I've seen divorces too. First one, my dad had an affair, the marriage was going down the drain anyway, the divorce happened. I don't remember exacly what the whole process. Second one Ithink just fell apart, Don't remember why it happened. Third one was going fine for awhile, than arguments started, than they got into a fight, she got punched real hard, they got divorced. From what Isee no pre-marital sex involved, just people who didn't learn to work things out and/or wouldn't change something in order to make it work better, plus some anger control problems. I'll certainly be keeping all this in mind for friendships and marriages later on in life. Notice, though, no sex issue,s at least that Isaw, it was mostly money or general problems issues.
For your examples, what did happen in these marriages? It would explain a lot more. In some cases, maybe people need counseling, or maybe need to ask arund to see if similar problems have happened and what worked and didn't work.
About moral decay: Saying premarital sex leads to decay or morals is morality nitpicking, in that people make up a lot of rules to get everyone to follow arlong with they few ipoortant ones. Maybe there are a lot of people who need this, I'm not really sure. But I don't like someone coming in and telling me to follow certain rules just because they are morality rules, I can figure out for myself why certain ones are important or not, and which ones that I'd follow.
A Freebie Worthy of Deebye - Minionman - 06-02-2005
Mithrandir,Jun 2 2005, 02:18 PM Wrote:Casual sex is an interesting topic. The prevailing logic is that, inevitably, one of the partners gets too attached, or takes it too far, etc. and then feelings end up getting hurt and problems ensue.
If both partners *don't* get emotionally attached however, is it really "wrong" for two consenting adults to have casual fun together? It seems like many people make so much more of sex than they need to. Obviously it's best with someone who you deeply care for and are committed to, but it's nothing to sniff at when done with someone who just wants to have fun as well.
[right][snapback]79401[/snapback][/right]
Well, I don't see it so much "wrong" as "probably a bad idea". There's possible attachment problems, diseases, sex addiction, etc. (these are in no particular order, except as I thought of them). That's probably why people say it's "wrong", to get to people who don't think about these things.
A Freebie Worthy of Deebye - Occhidiangela - 06-02-2005
Mithrandir,Jun 2 2005, 02:18 PM Wrote:Casual sex is an interesting topic. The prevailing logic is that, inevitably, one of the partners gets too attached, or takes it too far, etc. and then feelings end up getting hurt and problems ensue.
If both partners *don't* get emotionally attached however, is it really "wrong" for two consenting adults to have casual fun together? It seems like many people make so much more of sex than they need to. Obviously it's best with someone who you deeply care for and are committed to, but it's nothing to sniff at when done with someone who just wants to have fun as well.
[right][snapback]79401[/snapback][/right]
The one night stand has its ups and downs . . . oh, no, there I go again! :w00t:
Occhi
A Freebie Worthy of Deebye - Any1 - 06-03-2005
Mithrandir,Jun 2 2005, 08:18 PM Wrote:Casual sex is an interesting topic. The prevailing logic is that, inevitably, one of the partners gets too attached, or takes it too far, etc. and then feelings end up getting hurt and problems ensue.
If both partners *don't* get emotionally attached however, is it really "wrong" for two consenting adults to have casual fun together? It seems like many people make so much more of sex than they need to. Obviously it's best with someone who you deeply care for and are committed to, but it's nothing to sniff at when done with someone who just wants to have fun as well.
[right][snapback]79401[/snapback][/right]
Casual sex can only stay "casual" if the frequency stays fairly low, IMHO. It's human nature to become attached to the person one is regularly sleeping with, as you indicated. There are of course people (of both genders) that for some reason or another don't want and/or can't form this close attachment with anyone. For an individual that is more or less psycologically sound, the feelings follow the act after a fairly short while.
Occhi, is there are precedence for a mod to self-ban? :whistling:
A Freebie Worthy of Deebye - ShadowHM - 06-03-2005
Doc,Jun 2 2005, 04:31 PM Wrote:Heck, I had fun too...
But I got one word. Disco.
See what random sexual encounters get us?
**Shudder**
White polyester suits...
Gold medallions.
[right][snapback]79408[/snapback][/right]
*shakes head in exasperation*
You do like to dwell on the negative, don't you? :wacko:
I have successfully forgotten disco. (And I never did either wear or date anyone who wore White polyester of any kind.)
Instead, there was: :wub: :wub: :wub:
Pink Floyd "Dark Side of the Moon"
Little Feat "Dixie Chicken"
Spirit "The Twelve Dreams of Dr. Sardonicus"
Dan Hicks and His Hot Licks "Where's the Money"
Queen "A Night at the Opera"
The Band "The Last Waltz"
I could go on and on and on.....
A Freebie Worthy of Deebye - Occhidiangela - 06-03-2005
Any1,Jun 2 2005, 06:42 PM Wrote:Occhi, is there are precedence for a mod to self-ban? :whistling:
[right][snapback]79431[/snapback][/right]
Sounds too much like self abuse to me. I'll pass. :blink:
A Freebie Worthy of Deebye - Occhidiangela - 06-03-2005
ShadowHM,Jun 2 2005, 07:04 PM Wrote:Spirit "The Twelve Dreams of Dr. Sardonicus"
Dan Hicks and His Hot Licks "Where's the Money"
[right][snapback]79434[/snapback][/right]
WOOT! Glad someone else remembers that great album.
Occhi
A Freebie Worthy of Deebye - DeeBye - 06-03-2005
I like to think that all 2000+ views of this thread are based purely on the fact that my internet name is in the thread title (even though Doc forgot to capitalise the 'B' :angry: ).
To stay on-topic, here is a smiley story about my first time having sex.
Her: "Let's go downstairs, just me and you."
Me: :huh:
Her: "It'll be fun. I have a surprise for you."
Me: :blink:
Her: "Yep."
Me: :)
Her: "We are all alone now and my parents aren't home."
Me: :blush:
Her: :blush:
Me: :unsure:
Her: "Let's DO IT!"
Me: :w00t:
Me: :ph34r:
Me: :shuriken:
Me: :)
Me: :D
Me: :P
Her: :whistling:
Me: B)
A Freebie Worthy of Deebye - whyBish - 06-03-2005
DeeBye,Jun 3 2005, 04:48 PM Wrote:[right][snapback]79445[/snapback][/right]Nice story :)
A Freebie Worthy of Deebye - whyBish - 06-03-2005
jahcs,Jun 3 2005, 07:11 AM Wrote:As far as sex and relationships go I would venture that monogamy is far more important than waiting until wedding vows are exchanged.Why? What's wrong with a 'bit (or three) on-the-side'? ... even within a marriage?
[right][snapback]79374[/snapback][/right]
The law doesn't have any problem with it...
A Freebie Worthy of Deebye - whyBish - 06-03-2005
Doc,Jun 3 2005, 07:58 AM Wrote:I can not even begin to imagine what my own personal hell might be like... But it would be baaaaaaaaaaaaad no doubt.Well, I guess in your personal hell Bush would become president ... oh wait :P
A Freebie Worthy of Deebye - Mithrandir - 06-03-2005
I think the ninja scares me the most Dee.
A Freebie Worthy of Deebye - Occhidiangela - 06-03-2005
whyBish,Jun 2 2005, 11:49 PM Wrote:Why? What's wrong with a 'bit (or three) on-the-side'? ... even within a marriage?
The law doesn't have any problem with it...
[right][snapback]79456[/snapback][/right]
Then its not much of a marriage, and thus no point in going to the altar in the first place. The law is not the issue, whybish, it is the violation of trust. That's personal.
Which takes us to the experiments in "open marriages." That fad, in the US at least, was unsustainable. Of course, there are probably still some that are working somewhere in Oregon and Northern California.
Back to "the goose and the gander both goosing outside the barnyard" is not that uncommon in arranged marriages, or marriages of convenience. But then, is it really a marriage? Not in my book. It a mercenary contract.
How about, polygamy, a standard for centuries? One sided, as I see it. You want to be part of the harem? Suit yourself. It is still a valid institution in some cultures. ANd as Duchess said to the Dirtwater Fox: "Six days off and one day on!"
One could take the French point of view, that a man's mistress and wife should never be introduced to one another (or something like that) but I suspect that is a PoV of the rich. And given the low birth rate among French, a contributor to their decline.
Occhi
A Freebie Worthy of Deebye - Occhidiangela - 06-03-2005
whyBish,Jun 2 2005, 11:50 PM Wrote:Well, I guess in your personal hell Bush would become president ... oh wait :P
[right][snapback]79457[/snapback][/right]
In my personal hell, Jerry Springer becomes president. With Madonna as Secretary of State. (I am guessing Jerry would spend most of the term trying to get into her britches, and she'd take over a . . .)