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

I'm in the 90%. When I was an innocent young virgin of 18 we were gathered together in a room and the NCOs showed us two hours of Ministry of Defence movies about the effects of venereal diseases. A few of us turned white, two went outside to be sick and one lad fainted. There were dicks of unimaginable degeneration. Boils, pustules, eaten away, leaking pus--stuff like that. All in colour. The hot needle treatment was explained and demonstrated on the patients.

It seared my little mind.

Actually hawk, I was rather gentle with PQ. She is only 20 after all. She is unaware of the trouble sex can cause.

And there's not much sense of prowess with sluts. It's more like a reflex. It lacks intellectual content. It's a bit like playing cricket with a tennis ball and kids doing the bowling. Corrupting the morals of a convent girl is much more fun.

As Larkin said "everyone felt the same" in the "quite unlosable game".

I'd bet the cad didn't even make her ears go pink never mind bright red. She certainly gave no indication of anything like that.

I don't agree that it is "her life". I explained why earlier. We are social animals not islands of being. Our behaviour impinges on others and often dramatically. I know of one slut who has totally ruined the lives of her grandparents. Taken half their financial resources and probably the other half coming up and all their happiness. It was either that or abandoning her and they can't bring themselves to do that and she knows it. They now wish they had never had children. And he's on a war injury pension. He's had to get rid of his racing pigeons.

Total rubbish. No--it doesn't make hawk's mother a slut. And PQ is obviously feeling guilt. Why the post otherwise? Why the defensiveness? Why the search for reassurance from silly sods like you.

And giving This or That players the choice between paprika and thyme hardly gets us admiring your intelligence now does it? Or your wit. If PQ takes any notice of you she is really in the ****. 100+ my arse.

What makes you think that Becksie? Social conditioning I suppose. The bra is a very recent invention in Darwinian timescales. The 40+ Reader's Wives XXX genre specialises in pendulosity and has a very large following.

In Proust's magnificent book there is Odette.

Wiki has this-



But observant readers don't fail to notice how Marcel slips in oh so casually that she has very large tits. Swann's real weakness. And he is a very sophisticated character.

You should read that sometime Becks when you have the time instead of the fashion mags which sell foundation garments.

Sex is like the most pleasurable thing ever. Another pleasurable thing is eating . No one calls you a slut if you eat a lot. I say lets all get naked and jump in a pile. Just don't any of you guys touch my butt.

Yes- and therein lies the danger. The downsides of sex are legion. And of food. And crack cocaine. And booze. And power. And shopping. If they weren't so tempting they wouldn't be dangerous.

The more pleasureable a thing the more circumspection is required. The lack of circumspection in those matters might be said to be the "big bang" of the financial crisis and that casting blame on bankers and real estate agents and regulators represents a mass denial and the predictable search for easy scapegoats.

Different words are used. Slut for sex, slob for food, piss-artist for booze, addict for drugs, traffic warden for power and bankrupt for shopaholics.

It's odd how there's no common word for the male equivalent of slut. Stud is hardly insulting in a male dominated world. Rake is almost a compliment. Goat is the nearest I can think of and even that is half a term of endearment. Wanker maybe. Libertine is no good because a libertine wouldn't be nervous about having his butt touched by a bloke. The essence of libertinage is that they will try anything and see how it goes rejecting those things that don't do it for them from their own experience of it rather than from warnings by Popes and their ilk.

Of course, all those things require sluts to become operative. Except a libertine. He'll try rape. He'll take his turn in the barrel.

The geography lecturer at a college I knew tried being caned. It was £1 a stroke, that's about £5 now, and a minimum of 10 with the money up front. One whack and he scooted. Making it a tenner a stroke. Efficient eh?

He was a Hitler fanatic too. And could eat soup, main course and dessert before the rest of us could pour ourselves a glass of water. What he would have thought of the new president I shudder to think. He died though. 56.

I always imagine a bloke like him teaching evolutionary theory. Those nuts who favour teaching that to kids allow themselves to believe that the teachers of it are all prim New England misses despite most of those being somewhat religious.

I very much doubt that were I to be entrusted with teaching it I could resist the many opportunities it presents for ribald drolleries and unseemly innuendos. And even hints of advice for the budding man-about-towners who can be found in most classrooms.

One might talk about teaching it from now to kingdom come, as they are attempting to do, but the logistics of actually teaching it is never allowed to disturb their attention-seeking and career-building heads.

I just would give it the go-by. There's quite sufficient material on telly on that subject. One of the reasons why talking about teaching it is so popular in the service of attention-seeking and career-building is that it is so easy and all the arguments are well known so that all you have to do is learn some lines. It can also last forever. It will even be going on after the USSC declares that only atheists are allowed to teach in schools. Or work in education administration. Which is the logic of their position. From a scientific point of view I mean. No delicate sentimentalities.

It also allows them to think of themselves as having a scientific cast of mind or even, in extreme cases, that they are actually scientists. And it's as simple and unscientific as those type of things ever get. There are "I believe"s, "I think"s, "it may be that"s, " Mr X wrote me to say"s, and suchlike, all through Darwin. And the gap in the fossil record is quietly ushered off stage on the grounds that it's "imperfect".

A lover needs a beloved too.

The ascetic life is seen as superior in many high quarters. It's certainly cheap. And it lasts a long time too. Pleasure/Time relativity theory.

Social conditioning? What -about the necessity of wearing a bra or that big boobs are better? Spendius - even with my little compact models, if you bounce or run or anything - it's uncomfortable. I don't know what girls with big boobs do. I come from a long line of the well-endowed and I have well-endowed friends and they all say they're a pain. They make your back hurt apparently, and yeah, saggage is a real problem for them.

I laughed long and hard at that one. 40 plus readers wives XXX, huh?
Well you know there's something for everyone I guess. It's all about asthetics. I don't find pendulosity (female pendulosity anyway) attractive -not even to look at. I'm just glad I'll never be expected to touch them.
Mathos said something really funny about that once - I'll try to remember exactly what he said.


It's the maternal image. No matter how sophisticated they are- most guys never get past it. They all seem to love being babied- especially by a woman with big breasts.

I don't read fashion magazines-ever. At this point I read the newspaper and that's about it. I'm going through a short attention span phase right now.

Exactly what I just said - a lot of men just want mommy (the disciplinarian model in this case, apparently).

Back in the day.... I had over 2000 sex partners and I'm not bragging about it believe me. Then came AIDS and I stopped being promiscuous on a dime. Fortunately I escaped the 60's through the 80's unscathed.

Does that mean I'm a slut or a disciplined common sense person?

Do whatever the hell you want up until the moment your behavior will injure someone else i say.

They don't bounce or run. Leovici, or Ledovicic, or something like that, claimed that ladies should not do energetic things. Disturbs their sensitive internal organs he said. They can't wear tight shorts or jockstraps.

They bounce a bit when they are walking to the ladies' room in the pub though but it doesn't look that energetic.

I have known two ladies, not Biblicly, who had surgery for breast reduction. But they were active types. One said that she had involuntarily back-flipped whilst bouncing on a trampoline. Saggage, a new word, I will introduce saggage quotients in the pub on Sat, may only case back-pain in active specimens. It could even be a posture problem. Or just one aspect of obesity.

I ought to be allowed to defend high saggage at least until all the scientific evidence is in. A lady of leisure might not have the same problem.

I have always been an enthusistic fan of short attention spans in ladies. I think that wonderful quality coupled to high saggage quotients represents my ideal woman. If she owns a pub as well I'm sunk. Shortsightedness is a pleasant refinement but hey--you can't have everything.

I have often wondered if Freud was right about early infant experiences on the grounds the if it is breast feeding that creates tit-men why does it not create women equally obsessed like me and hawk. Which leads me to think that aesthetic tastes are different between the sexes. It's a cliche that girls suck on their pencils when trying to think what to write.

I don't think it so much as "babied". It's more the loss of ego in the overwhelming soft floundering in my humble and honest opinion. One needs a break from one's ego from time to time.

Okay- I'll believe you. But that's at least 1,999 ladies, I presume, who were left behind. A bit insulting to them. I think that once a lady has bestowed her favours on you that she has then the right to be the one who terminates the relationship.

VIZ, our adult comic, once described a young lady as the type who, after allowing you to kiss her under the miseltoe, would come round, if you hadn't contacted her by the next afternoon and strangle your cat. Queenie did mention a temptation to "stalk".



What about helping to raise levels of air pollution driving. That is often said to be a cause of injury to others and to risk it. It's a very immoral statement BP because you are subjectively defining injury to others and thus tailoring your ethics.

Sounds more like a machine.

.
Well, yeah - except in about ten percent of the population.

It may be a cliche - but I suck, chew whatever on my pen . I always had to wipe it off if a student needed to borrow it.

I never chewed on a pencil though. I have this vivid memory of the pencil of a friend of mine - and it always had teeth marks on it. I always thought that was so strange.

To tell you the truth I really don't see what you women see in men. The number of men I meet nowadays who are not worse than a fork grating on a tin plate is negligible. I regularly see women yawning in their faces and even that doesn't stop the flow of self congratulatory oral flatulence.

If I was a woman I would definitely be a lesbian. I can't be a poof because I can't stand the sight of men and that's when they have their clothes on. Naked I would rather live in an Igloo at the North Pole with only a transistor radio with one station selling Latvian concrete kerbstones.

Taking them on because they mow the ******* lawns and fix the punctures is whoring IMO.

Spendius said
.
That would be the difference in gender aesthetics you were talking about. I like a lot of things about men.

Sounds like you're just meeting the wrong men Spendius.


You learn how to ignore it. That's when I turn on my music.


You can choose? I'd love to see you as a lesbian...there's my laugh for the morning. I'll be chuckling all day thinking about that.


we all do what we gotta do. I mow my own lawn though and my dad wouldn't let me get a driver's license until I showed him I could change a flat tire (now that they use air wrenches though I can't get the lug nuts loose - so that knowledge is neither here nor there).

It's a reciprocal contract - like the one you were talking about a few posts back-ideally both sides find it mutually beneficial, or they find a way to make it feel mutually beneficial.

Your misogynism never ceases to amaze me.

Now, you are about misandrism.

Tell me more, as it happens to me to be a misandrist myself at times...

Francis said:

I don't think Spendius is a misogynist. I think he just has that whole Madonna/whore dichotomy going on and has yet to reconcile with the fact that one woman can truly personify both sides at different times and in different situations with different people with complete and utter truth and integrity.

That's why I said that it amazes me.

I said once:


Others have disagreed at the time..

He said he has no other choice than being a misogynist..

And you know, that leads us back to the original thought behind this thread. A lot of men have trouble with that and a lot of women have trouble allowing OTHER women to be both those things - even though they know inside themselves - they're both those things sometimes.

It's just a matter of allowing someone to fully realize all the potential aspects of his or her personality without automatically deeming that person hypocritical or assigning a label to someone who decides to fully express all aspects of their personality even when one aspect might seem to clash with another.

Francis said:


I read that too Francis - but he said he feared rather than hated women. I took it to mean he was aware of their power and gave them their proper awe and respect.
That's the opposite of a misogynist.

Ok, but let's say that nonetheless, some are beyond good and evil...