How many people is it acceptable to have.....

@aidan,

I'm used to pretenses, whatever kind...

1 Reply

@Francis,

no pretense here - I didn't know what it was - I didn't pretend that I did.

0 Replies

It was a weak joke on -273 Kelvin. Becks in (geddit) Everything grinds to a halt. Sorry.

0 Replies

@aidan,

I'll respond to Becksie's post 3,564,602 later. There is an interesting Test Match on.

But I'd like to make a couple of points relating to matters on here assuming osso doesn't mind. I would probably make them anyway even if I assumed she did. Making a little entertainment is the name of the game not bitching about others doing.

First then: One of the Roman religious cults of Fortuna was restricted to respectable matrons ( univirae, one prick I guess) and a rite of the main feast involved bringing in a woman of loose morals who was then expelled with physical and verbal abuse. This ritual was seen to demonstrate the respectability and moral virtue of the matrons by emphasising the distance they keep from the morals of the victim.

Thus, one might say, that approving of Queenie's confession demonstrates the precise opposite and strongly suggests that those approving it are people of loose morality in the sexual sphere.

It may be seen as a general principle whereby those who condemn a particular behaviour are ritualistically demonstrating that is one they cannot be accused of themselves. Of course, some people often wonder why they feel the need to do this and whether they have been guilty themselves. Elderly ladies with a chequered past are noteworthy for this tactic.

The second point relates to another matter we see on these threads. The Roman religious cult of Mithras was popular in the army. It stressed the masculine virtues of courage, agression and militancy, the exercise of which creates the conditions for the practice of the feminine cults which are dependent upon the successful exercise of masculine virtues. It has been said that the existence of the Mithras cult actually fosters the feminine cults.

Thus the practice of misogyny is of direct benefit to ladies. By challenging the feminine virtues head on it produces a reaction in the ladies in defence of their sex and the stronger the challenge the stronger the reaction.

I would argue that the mealy-mouthed practioners of uxuriousness around ladies are muting their femininity and seeking to control it and I think that those men who are quick to charge their fellows with misogyny are frightened of authentic female responses and are seeking to bottle them up in a sort of verbal syrup from which it is difficult to get free and, I would imagine, very frustrating. Many a sporting event is brought to life when one side stikes a telling blow.

That will be why Ms Pomeroy writes of misogyny as displaying real affection, trust and respect and why so much humour is based upon it.

Think of all the bottled up put-downs of the male sex which are pre-empted and defused by very, very nice men using this cheap and easy cloying trick and being very, very nice all the ******* time for ever and ******* ever. Amen.

Wonderful Test Match. I love seeing England getting a good stuffing.

PS. The particular cult I was referring to was later disbanded and its temple demolished when the matrons were discovered shagging all over town.

1 Reply

@aidan,

Quote:

Are all husbands henpecked?

No. Only those who have granted a monopoly for their sexual relief. Everybody knows how monopolies behave.

Quote:

and in fact worked out so much that he ended up divorced.

Another reject of the sisterhood. It gets worse.

Quote:

I thought she chickened out so you didn't have to pay up.

If you mean money it was hardly a consideration.

Quote:

But you saw her bum, did you?

Indeed I did. And more than once.

Quote:

I'd like to meet her.

That's out. She went a bit funny due to tragic events within her own kinship network.

1 Reply

@The Pentacle Queen,

I say the number you stop at. Use condoms.

1 Reply

@Charlie001,

I say the number The Pope says. I must admit though that I have not stuck to that.

Once you put on a condom you are no longer having sex. You can persuade yourself you are but then you would wouldn't you? And that applies to any artificial, chemical or mechanical, form of birth control.

But Jesus said--"if thine eye offendeth thee-pluck it out". So vasectomy has divine sanction. Laying the onus on the lady really sucks. Big time.

0 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

I'll respond to Becksie's post 3,564,602 later.

Good, because I really am interested in hearing your answers to my questions.

Quote:

But I'd like to make a couple of points relating to matters on here assuming osso doesn't mind. I would probably make them anyway even if I assumed she did. Making a little entertainment is the name of the game not bitching about others doing.

Yeah, I think this stuff is directly on topic.

Quote:

First then: One of the Roman religious cults of Fortuna was restricted to respectable matrons ( univirae, one prick I guess) and a rite of the main feast involved bringing in a woman of loose morals who was then expelled with physical and verbal abuse. This ritual was seen to demonstrate the respectability and moral virtue of the matrons by emphasising the distance they keep from the morals of the victim.

How horrible.

Quote:

Thus, one might say, that approving of Queenie's confession demonstrates the precise opposite and strongly suggests that those approving it are people of loose morality in the sexual sphere.

Yes, maybe if we were socialized via the Roman religious cult of Fortuna- but in this day and age, having been socialized via Christian morals and ethics, it could just mean that we're refusing to judge (or throw the first stone).

Quote:

It may be seen as a general principle whereby those who condemn a particular behaviour are ritualistically demonstrating that is one they cannot be accused of themselves. Of course, some people often wonder why they feel the need to do this and whether they have been guilty themselves. Elderly ladies with a chequered past are noteworthy for this tactic.

Yeah, like former smokers who become the most vociferously opposed to smoking.

Quote:

The second point relates to another matter we see on these threads. The Roman religious cult of Mithras was popular in the army. It stressed the masculine virtues of courage, agression and militancy, the exercise of which creates the conditions for the practice of the feminine cults which are dependent upon the successful exercise of masculine virtues. It has been said that the existence of the Mithras cult actually fosters the feminine cults.

That makes sense.

Quote:

Thus the practice of misogyny is of direct benefit to ladies. By challenging the feminine virtues head on it produces a reaction in the ladies in defence of their sex and the stronger the challenge the stronger the reaction.

Yes, too bad that tactic is even necessary though. What's wrong with simple acceptance (if we truly are talking about VIRTUES)?

Quote:

I would argue that the mealy-mouthed practioners of uxuriousness around ladies are muting their femininity and seeking to control it and I think that those men who are quick to charge their fellows with misogyny are frightened of authentic female responses and are seeking to bottle them up in a sort of verbal syrup from which it is difficult to get free and, I would imagine, very frustrating. Many a sporting event is brought to life when one side stikes a telling blow.

So you're sure these mealy-mouthed practioners of uxuriousness around ladies are not sincerely appreciative of female virtues?
How do you know that?

Quote:

That will be why Ms Pomeroy writes of misogyny as displaying real affection, trust and respect and why so much humour is based upon it.

Think of all the bottled up put-downs of the male sex which are pre-empted and defused by very, very nice men using this cheap and easy cloying trick and being very, very nice all the ******* time for ever and ******* ever. Amen.

Wonderful Test Match. I love seeing England getting a good stuffing.

I think it's all a matter of temperament and perspective - I mean - how one chooses to look at it.

Quote:

PS. The particular cult I was referring to was later disbanded and its temple demolished when the matrons were discovered shagging all over town.

Isn't that always the way?

1 Reply

@spendius,

Quote:

Quote:
I thought she chickened out so you didn't have to pay up.

If you mean money it was hardly a consideration.

I didn't mean money - I don't even know her - I wouldn't insult her like that.
I meant pay up as in actually do anything she wanted, as you told her you would.

0 Replies

Fascinating stuff.

In answer to the original question - it simply doesn't matter how many men you had sex with. What matters is how you feel about each and every one of the sexual encounters that you had. As you've learnt, you can feel differently about each individual one. Each encounter contributes something to your life, and you learn something from them. By what you've learn, I mean, the answers to questions like : is there a pattern emerging, has it affected the level of : your happiness, your self respect, your confidence, your trust in yourself etc

It is my view that you don't engage in activities that diminish your self-esteem. And that is the only qualification I would make on how many people you have sex with, how many at once, what type of sex etc.

......................
Interesting quotes I found while browsing :

Quote:

thoughts along the line of being a village bicycle may be producing the thoughts of guilt, and questions of respect that she's mentioned in her posts

that's a topic all of it's own.

Quote:

Thats EXATLY WHY I'm upset. I really resent that patronising post and the accusation of being the village bicycle. I do not want to 'give EVERYONE a ride.'

Of course not - only those who turn you on in the right way when you're horny.

Quote:

I needed to have my fun,

and release tension, and find who you are, etc.

Quote:

It just proves my point, society is telling me that I should feel worthless for what I've done

If you are upset, you are either listenning to society (in which case a stronger creation of who you are would help), or you fighting internally within yourself (which occurs in the former anyway, but can occur from your own beliefs)

Quote:

That's unfair Queenie. You can't go imagining your own definitions.

Your own definitions of words like 'slut' and 'love' would be completely fair, would it not? Every word we know is defined by ourselves, despite dictionaries.

Quote:

You do have to take account of what others think

A complete untruth. Your happiness, who you are, the integrity with with you interact in this world, all come from within, irrespective of others reactions and manipulations.

Quote:

That's disgraceful Queenie

Poppycock. Disgraceful acts always occur from weak willed self betrayal. 95% of the use of this word is purely 'being judgemental' - judgemental is another word for condescending "I know better than you", "my morals are better than yours", "how can you be so dumb" etc.

2 Replies

@vikorr,

Of course, I too occasionaly indulge in judgmental behaviour. Not sure how old this article is, but good luck with it PQ.

0 Replies

@aidan,

Quote:

How horrible.

Christine Keeler and Mandy Rice Davies were soundly booed, struck with umbrellas, and stuff, everytime they entered or left the Old Bailey when they were giving evidence in the Stephen Ward case. French women who "fraternised" with German military during the occupation of Paris were victimised after the relief. The lady who bared her breast at the Superbowl was castigated in a nationwide frenzy. Media is endlessly fascinated with women of loose morals. A good, juicy story about them sells papers. In rape cases the attitude of the court is to a certain extent conditioned by the previous history of the victim and it is well known that women jurors are more likely to weigh that than men jurors. Judge Pickles reduced the sentence of a convicted rapist because of the dress the victim was wearing when the offence was committed and the time of night she was flaunting herself.

Whether rightly or wrongly a large number of people think that female immorality is a threat to the stabilty of society.

Quote:

Yes, maybe if we were socialized via the Roman religious cult of Fortuna- but in this day and age, having been socialized via Christian morals and ethics, it could just mean that we're refusing to judge (or throw the first stone).

Who is the "we"? I think that the number of people who would condemn Queenie is much larger than those who would approve. She admitted her family would be mortified. I don't think you have taken into account my mentioning property relations and inheritance.

Nobody is throwing any stones. One might say that Queenie was taking the piss out of the chaste girls. There was no particular need for her to be in their face with the story.

Quote:

What's wrong with simple acceptance (if we truly are talking about VIRTUES)?

Nothing. But human nature does take a great interest in such matters. Expressing disinterest may simply be a claim to "sophistication" and to being above the common herd.

Quote:

So you're sure these mealy-mouthed practioners of uxuriousness around ladies are not sincerely appreciative of female virtues?
How do you know that?

I've had it off their wives.

Quote:

Isn't that always the way?

Well--yes-- there is supposd to be a biological advantage to female promiscuity. That is at the root of the debate about teaching Darwinianism. Why the proponents of teaching Darwinianism are frightened of the matter is presumably because of their residual Christianity, which they can't escape, and their attitude to the female members of their immediate family. They wish to promote female promiscuity, which is what Darwin's theory adds up to, for other men's daughters. That's why the Dover trial was a farce. If I remember correctly Judge Jones has a number of daughters and I'll bet he would have something to say if I was teaching evolution to them. He was allowed, indulged one might say, to think the argument hinges on things like blood clotting cascades in chiclids and fossilised toe-bones of bats. (Pause for sardonic laughter as long as you're not a Dover tax payer who got stuffed.)

"The beauty parlour's filled with sailors,
The circus is in town. " Bob Dylan. Desolation Row.

I would imagine that if Queenie's behaviour was accepted and approved then every woman would be required by law to have regular tests and carry around a certificate of health and maybe even valid third party insurance.

1 Reply

@vikorr,

Quote:

That's disgraceful Queenie

Quote:

Poppycock.

I was being a touch ironic vik. It was early in the thread's proceedings.

Had she, as I have envisaged, cocked her leg over the balustrade and serviced the hunting party, the sort of daily occurrence one might easily find in de Sade's writings, what would you have said? As her father say? Or boyfriend? Or husband?

Where would you draw the line? I hope it isn't a "not in my backyard" position you are taking.

0 Replies

There's an example of intellectual, urban sophistication in Henry Miller.

He tells of sitting in a boozer with a number of men and a packet of "dirty" postcards being passed around. The lady in the photographs turned out to be the wife of one of them. When he saw it he remarked "It's a small world."

1 Reply

@spendius,

Spendius, as the boyfriend/husband of a woman, you both agree together to certain things (if you've been smart enough to talk about it), certain committments, and as many people give their heart into the care of the other, you also have certain responsibilities towards the other. There are other things implicit in such relationships. None of this is the case in PQ's original question.

As the father...fathers sights are always clouded on this issue, because they want their daughters to be a certain way, and they want to protect them (in the way the father feels is best). None of this makes for clear sightedness of who the daughter is at that moment in time, and what she needs (rather than what the father needs and wants).

1 Reply

@vikorr,

You have the advantage over me vik. I can't do vicarage tea-party homilies. I think of these things in terms of "the vital bodily fluids" and the sweaty grunting. The bottom line so to speak. Dressing it all up in euphemisms is not my cup of tea.

I'm not bothered about being seen as a responsible and respectable member of society who is all confused about which other hand it's on. I see fathers talking about other men's daughters who would start swinging wildly if you talked about their own daughters in a similar vein.

Queenie is loose in a corrupt and vice ridden capital city and in the art world part of it with a bit of waitressing on the side. She is young, beautiful and talented and she has biology not in the biology lessons. Her parents are not on the scene. I was trying a bit, not a lot, to stand in for them and express a rose-spectacled view of what they would think if she was honest enough to tell them what she told us.

Run her story through your head in short sentences cutting out inessential details and filling in the missed out parts which everybody seems ashamed to mention such good Christians are they beneath the veneer of tolerance and modern sophistication.

It isn't easy discussing these things with moral relativists. Who are drawing their own line in the sand. Moral relativists would do well to read de Sade and Miller's Opus Pistorum. Or watch some of the porn being beamed in by satellite and piped into posh hotels in cities which attract foreign visitors of various shades of occupation. And, indeed, into this very medium on which we are discussing this matter. Two clicks away. Other men's daughters play the leading ladies. In the un-gay genre I mean.

And the roles they play don't look like they need any special apprenticships, lessons or highly practiced skills. Anybody's daughter could manage them. At a pinch. Or most of them at least. And the money's good I've heard.

Hey- that's an idea. We can start referring to ladies like Queenie and Becksie as "un-gay". I'm un-gay. They stole that lovely word and I'm stealing it back. How pleased most ladies would be if they heard somebody had referred to them as "extremely un-gay".

0 Replies

@spendius,

Spendius said:

Quote:

Whether rightly or wrongly a large number of people think that female immorality is a threat to the stabilty of society.

Yes, I'm not disagreeing with that. But how can an ungay female behave immorally without the active participation of an ungay male? And that brings me back to the question I asked in my other post - do you really believe that females and males should be held to different moral standards when it comes to sex. Because sweetheart - she can't be promiscuous unless there's someone willing to be promiscuous with her.

Quote:

Who is the "we"? I think that the number of people who would condemn Queenie is much larger than those who would approve.

And just because someone doesn't judge or condemn Queenie, doesn't mean they automatically approve. And I don't like saying that she, herself should be condemned - although that's what those women who booed and hit those women with umbrellas were doing. You may not like the behavior and you can condemn certain behavior with out automatically condemning or passing judgment on those who engage in that behavior. Sometimes there's a reason for it.

Quote:

What's wrong with simple acceptance (if we truly are talking about VIRTUES)?

Nothing. But human nature does take a great interest in such matters. Expressing disinterest may simply be a claim to "sophistication" and to being above the common herd

.
You missed my point. If they're virtues - what's not to like?

Quote:

I would imagine that if Queenie's behaviour was accepted and approved then every woman would be required by law to have regular tests and carry around a certificate of health and maybe even valid third party insurance.

Yeah - not a bad idea. As the mother of both a son and a daughter - it scares the **** out of me that people might be out there screwing around with everyone and his or her brother or sister and lying about it. That was my original point on the thread.
I was the one who tried to point out to her how important truth in that aspect is- you're the one who told her to lie so a guy could go on believing that he was the one with the biggest prick.

1 Reply

@aidan,

Quote:

We can start referring to ladies like Queenie and Becksie as "un-gay".

What does this mean?

2 Replies

@aidan,

Quote:

Run her story through your head in short sentences cutting out inessential details and filling in the missed out parts which everybody seems ashamed to mention such good Christians are they beneath the veneer of tolerance and modern sophistication.

This behavior is not new. When I was in university - my first roommate was a girl from Florida. By the third night at school - I was sleeping in a twin bed next to her and a guy. Every night! I finally had to move because I had to get up at 5 to work in the kitchen every morning and I couldn't get any sleep.

My next roommate (who is a LOVELY person and my friend to this day- twenty-five years later) did the same ****. Sometimes two different guys in a night - and she was raised a devout Catholic.

My next roommate (also a lovely person with whom I am still friends and the daughter of a Presbyterian minister) did the same thing. Only not in front of me - she'd lock me out of the room. I can't tell you how many nights I slept on the counter in the telephone room with no pillow, blanket, I couldn't even take my contacts out of my eyes because my contact case was in the room and she wouldn't open the door.
So I asked her - 'M, what the ****?' She said, ' It's the only time I feel attractive.' This is the smartest, most competent, most lovely person in the world.
Who knows why? I can't presume to analyze it and I don't.
It has nothing to do with sophistication or fake tolerance. I loved these girls- and still do . They straightened it all out.
I'm just glad I didn't hit them with umbrellas so they'd end up hating ME.

*and before you say that I'm just being self-righteous by intimating that I was above engaging similarly - there was a definite part of me that wished I could have been a little more free and easy about it all. I also said that in my very first post on this thread.

1 Reply

@aidan,

Quote:

What does this mean?

Ladies who are man mad. Or blokes who are woman mad. Un-gay is in the Urban dictionary meaning that. I only thought I had invented it. Somebody got there first it seems. Which doesn't surprise me seeing as how easy it was. Obvious even. I might have invented the idea of popularising it to try to bring it into ordinary everyday usage. So that an observer might say, without really thinking, that Johanna Lumley's ungay Irish Butter ad. was a good example of her type-casting as a womanly woman.

I mean to say Becks. There was a bit of steam in your prose when you mentioned Tito's shorts. An un-gay response. A gay woman would find Tito's shorts despicable and make disrespectful remarks about them.

1 Reply

How many people is it acceptable to have.....

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know