Slut or Virgin?

[marc]

I think people have gone a bit ott on this one.

I never set out to be a slag but many mates called me one. I was always looking for a relationship but people tell you one thing just to get you in bed. So as a result mates used to see me with a different guy all the bloody time.

I got a reputation it did not bother me cause in fact I just turned it around and said you wish you could do it lol. A lot of my mates were and still are in their same relationships but in order for them to work they are in open relationships, I personally do not see the point but each to their own.

Some people think they will meet one person straight away and spend the rest of their life with them, sorry it does not work out that way all the time. I wish it would but it only actually happens to 1% of people.

I hate talking about my past but 20 years ago things were very very different to now days.

Did I meet people knowing I would have sex with them, when I was 18 yes as I was not ready to settle down and neither were school friends. Does it make me a better person now? yes as I have learnt and trust me I have learnt the hard way been hurt many times.

 

[Dave]

I had the best sex of my life (so far) on a one night stand (didn't give me an itch after either!), it was fun to experience the thrill of pulling and the weird shame when you leave their house in the morning, pulling a cheeky smirk while walking off.

At the moment I neither want a relationship nor a sexual relationship, got too much to focus on at the moment finishing up university work, if anything crops in this time i.e. one night fling then awesome.

A-Kid's argument is a bit flawed seeing how selling sex has been around for thousands of years....nothing new, just new mediums of showing/exploring it appear and influence peoples attitudes and morals on the subject. In 20 years time we all could be hush hush about it and it's only kept in the bedroom.

 

[Snoo]

Although I'm not really one for one night stands.. they have happened. BUT I rarely introduce someone to my parents before the 4th or 5th date.

 

[A-Kid]

^^Got to look at it from the third person to see what I'm getting at really. Its very off-topic, but I'll press on.

The Media has got to be a major sourse of this modern day problem. It programs people. This is how you should live etc. Music videos being borderline porn, Magazines pointing out the tiniest of flaws in people. The News dictating to us. Again videos Glamorizing Sex, Drugs, Achohol, Party/Clubbing like theres no tomorrow like its the only thing to live for. Its seen so oftern that people will think nothing of it, what was something very hush of the past.

People high up the wealth ladder (I.e Music/film stars) with these ideal lives, people will aspire to. Trouble is we have all the wrong types as the role models. All those aspects of the ideal life filter down, copyed, and start to be seen as the 'cool'/'in' thing to do to young teens, the result turning towns into no-go zones at night because people are sheep and follow this 'glamorized' ideal lifestyle that the Media has produced, in order to look 'normal' and not outcasted from a social standpoint. It sounds stupid to me but thats how it seems to be...

Before even as recent as the 90's, it wasn't as 'in your face' and regular or so disinct like it is now. The 30's - 50's seemed more of a romantic period, where what was glamorized was something respectable. It wasn't wide open for kids to watch as it simply wasn't as acessable. Should Kids be watching music videos where women are made to look like hookers and Men like pimps? Really? No... But its the norm in this decade, so mch the norm that people arn't even aware of the problem... so the kids will follow suite, being encoraged to shag about and get pissed.

Sure Sex and booze has always been there, but it didn't form the majority of our lifestyle and people knew their limits. Everything was respectable. Nothing was publicised or shown up. Now its almost top priority, with no limits to the 'social standard' types as I call them to pop their cherry and get so wasted they can't remember their names. It dominates our lives. They can't escape what with TV, Cinema, Computers, Games, Mags and whatever else we use to see Slaggy celebrity lives forced down our mouths. And the bar keeps raising...

I suppose there is no wrong or right way to live a life, we just need control and to alter this for future generations...

 

[Dave]

^ Hmmm, I was going to post about each paragraph but I kept repeating myself....plus you sound like you're preaching, might as well say I'm going to hell for getting drunk and having sex with a un-married woman and it's Lady GaGa's fault.

 

[Hixee]

Frankly A-Kid I find your signature/avatar set too sexually provoking. After all, she is one of these so called 'role' models.

:lol:

 

[A-Kid]

^^Preaching? More suming up on an area of which we need to improve on. Its not like I'm saying "oh ban sex and achohol entirely". We just need to have a limit as we are distroying ourselves. Every other country can do it...

^She isn't in the same class. She is respectable, inspiring, extremely talented songwriter and is the perfect role model for young people. She's totaly against the average sex/drunken raging lifestyles. She likes to be herself and actually appreciates where she is, unlike the types I'm showing up. Shes not a party goer or one to drink at all. And I really mean tea total. She is the opposite to the disgrace that is Kesha, Rianana and the majority of the R&B Pop genre alike them.

I'm quite frankly going to stop here as I'm not going to get into a riot over someone as sweet as her...

 

[gavin]

I mean, I am a virgin and I'd rather lose my virginity to somebody who is also a virgin

Don't. It will be rubbish!

I'm with Ben and Jordan on this one. The extremely judgmental tone that some people are taking is so completely over the top that it's bordering on the ridiculous. I see nothing wrong with doing what you want with your own body. Provided that it's between consenting adults, who gives a ****?

It's interesting actually to see that the "shock horror" responses are from people with less experience of what the topic's about. That's not a judgement call by the way; in a way the naivety is quite endearing, but the far more level-headed posts are coming from the more experienced members.

Let's come back to this topic in a couple of years time and see how things change.

 

[Hixee]

Oh boy... that was sad.

 

[Ben]

I'm with Ben and Jordan on this one... but the far more level-headed posts are coming from the more experienced members...

Um, what are you suggesting Jordan and I are

In case people don't want to read A-Kid's post, here's a summary...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh2sWSVRrmo[/youtube]

And A-Kid, if you think the 30s-50s were some haven of romance and love, you're an idiot. Apart from when everyone was trying to kill each other, there was a LOT of sex... Hello, during the war JUST how many women ****ed random soldiers...? Celebrities were JUST as deprived as they are now. You think deaths related to abuse of substances are a new thing in Hollywood? They really, really aren't. OK, with the invention of new forms of media now there is certainly more awareness of what goes on, but, that is not a bad thing, becuase there is also a LOT more education on the harms of drinking, the dangers of sex. If someone doesn't listen, sorry, their own fault.

You think there could have be a sexual liberation without a sexuality that needed liberating?

I would never, ever, ever want to go back to a time where we don't talk about what makes people fundamentally human. Sorry, but, humans beings ARE animals, sometimes they act like them, it's human nature and should not be covered-up so it doesn't "corrupt" the youth.

Please, please, please live before you give everyone the "BUT THINK OF THE CHILDREN" speech.

 

[gavin]

what are you suggesting Jordan and I are?

Amoral whores obviously.

Or

Sensible, thoughtful people with an ability to seperate mental and physical, and an ability to realise that sex and love don't necessarily have to go together (though it's nice when they do), that sex can be just as meaningful outside the expectations and assumptions of a relationship, and without a naive assumption that early relationships/experiences are the be all and end all.

You choose.

 

[A-Kid]

Yeah Ben just to clarify, 30/50's I was talking about what the Media Glamorizes. Not what actually goes on behind closed doors.

Even if I had done the deed, I would still think the same. Needing to 'live' a bit is irrelevant.

Edit: Reply to Below: Well I don't want that in any-way shape or form. Basically we could wrap this up in a nutshell and say that we need to get people to actually think before opening there legs. Thats less of a mouth full.

 

[Ben]

OK, media glamification of the 30s-50s...

The main source of mass media in this period was Hollywood films, and audience numbers were the highest they've ever been. Before TV killed it, this was how most people go their views of what was "normal" to do...

But, film at this point was under strict moral guidance from a group called the Catholic League of Decency, as well as the Motion Picture Production Code. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hays_Code and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Legion_of_Decency) Both of these had one thing very much in common - they were religious, and mostly Catholic. They were the ways which religions controlled what everyone saw. These banned such OUTRAGES as homosexuality, inter-racial relations, the idea there might be corruption in state institutions or even slightly offensive language (it took a LOT of work to get "Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn" allowed).

Um, so, yeah, if you want to go back to religion controlling everything we see in mass media, you go boy, but, I won't be joining you there. And next time you think something was so much better "back then", you might want to research what was actually happening "back then".

Although, of course, if we admit it was still going on behind closed doors anyway, what's wrong with being open about it? I don't get that? Making it into a sin is only making it more tempting for people.

History - it's useful occasionally.

 

[furie]

Basically we could wrap this up in a nutshell and say that we need to get people to actually think before opening there legs. Thats less of a mouth full.

Why? You eat sweets because they taste nice, even though they can cause diabetes, weight problems and tooth decay. Considerably more harmful physically than spreading your legs.

Don't tell me you've never pushed the envelope a little in the car. Got it a bit too fast to get the adrenaline pumping. Same thing, you're putting yourself and others at physical risk for self-gratification.

Why not settle for some mutal-gratification at no physical harm to anyone? Why is it such a terrible thing? I've no idea because sex beats any drug, any coaster, any experience I ever want. It's a fantastic joining of two physical beings in a state of ecstasy.

At the time it's an incredibly physically satisfying moment. Afterwards there's a brilliant sense of calm, well being and "togetherness". For days afterwards you can still float on a euphoric high and the significant boost in self confidence is like nothing else you will ever experience.

All of this without any abuse, any physical damage, and real harm. It's no wonder it's a "drug" of choice for most people.

 

[gavin]

film at this point was under strict moral guidance from a group called the Catholic League of Decency, as well as the Motion Picture Production Code

Off topic, but watch some of Mae West's films. She got around the Hays Code by writing seemingly innocent scripts, which passed through, but delivering the lines in a very sexual, innuendo-filled way; the woman was a **** ing genius and WAY ahead of her time.

 

[marc]

Can I just say people keep going on about the media reporting about all this stuff.

Right the reason why it is in the media now days is because it is cheep to make these programmes and people get off on them. If no one watched them they would not be made, they are also being made as part of sex education that we got at school back in my day.

It is no different now to years ago, it is just more spoken about people are more open about it.

Does it make someone a worse person for sleeping with 100 people or 2? No as long as they are safe and not casing any harm.

 

[thx]

Hmm... I'd go for the slut, as if it's only short-termed then sure I want the sex. Which is a bit ironic, considering I pulled this chick 1.5 months ago who later at 'that stage' said she was a virgin, which did sort of scare me and yeah I've being seeing her since, but only for coffee/museum etc. as she's really nice in other ways. Then there are two other ones at a sort of dating stage, yet as long as I/we don't decide that we are together, I think you shouldn't feel guilty or anything at all. Sure I still go for one night stands when it happens.
And as a sort of response to A-Kid, sort of echoing what furie has said: when you get a one-night stand, it's usually (at least for me) a sort of thing that happens and in the spur of the moment it can be ecstatic and exciting. Also, it's a bit of a different feeling when you just mutually let go for something both parts want without needing to feel obliged to commit yourself to anything more. Yet, if it happens you really like that person, surely you could continue seeing that person and maybe later on voilá you might have gotten yourself a partner for a long term relationship. Having said that, I would prefer to be in a steady relationship right now and not in this sort of "in betweenish- mode", which is a bit stressing, yet still has it's perks, because of the 'freedom'.

 

[nadroJ]

Basically we could wrap this up in a nutshell and say that we need to get people to actually think before opening there legs. Thats less of a mouth full.

I think before opening my legs. I think we're probably going to have a really good time right about now, it's going to be great, we're both going to go away happy and relieved from this. Maybe something will happen relationship-wise, maybe it won't, but either way we're both going to get something pleasurable out of this and that is basically the point of what I am about to do.

What do you think, that we just grab any random person and just **** them without a thought?

Edit: And, you think whoever that girl is in your set isn't being used somewhere to sell sex? If it was all about how sweet she is, and what a lovely personality she has, then why is she looking seductively at you from most of the pictures you have her in? Just because it's someone you like and respect doesn't make them exempt from whatever ludicrous point you're trying to make, that's just down right hypocritical.

 

[ciallkennett]

I mean, I am a virgin and I'd rather lose my virginity to somebody who is also a virgin

Don't. It will be rubbish!

Best. Advice. Ever.

I know it will, but meh, I'll be the best she's ever had! (and also equally the worst...)...

I agree with a lot of people in this topic. I mean, I don't give a **** if you screw 5 people in your lifetime or 500, as long as you are comfortable, enjoy yourself, stay safe and don't hurt anybody, it's no biggy

 

[marc]

Basically we could wrap this up in a nutshell and say that we need to get people to actually think before opening there legs. Thats less of a mouth full.

Less than a mouth full is never good