Don't pull a muscle reaching so far
Now you're just reaching.
Yes, it takes two to have sex.
Don't pretend it's the same thing for each person, though.
You know, colloquialism and stereotype are just fine for a sympathetic joke between men. But they don't make for a proper argument about the reality of interpersonal relationships. They're mere stereotypes.
Because the mental and physical aren't the same. I would have thought this is obvious, but thank you for correcting me on that gross error.
The proper comparison would be that a woman demanding constant emotional support can give none. And, yes, I've been through that before, too. Some people are just like that.
Actually, I think you're wrong on that. You could not have very easily put up with it to keep getting laid, else you would have.
Maybe if you had come up with something other than the gold-digger stereotype, I could take that point more seriously.
Because you're right. People endure discomfort in exchange for things they want. Most people, for instance, hate their jobs. At least, it seems that way. Yet they get up and go to work and do at least enough to stay employed because they want the money.
But, to use my former partner as an example, I have no idea what it was she was getting out of the relationship. Sure as hell wasn't money. She lied to me to stay in it even while she didn't like me as a person and didn't like having sex with me. And like I said elsewhere, nobody should have to feel that way just to get laid, or whatever. Seriously, I don't understand what it was she got out of the relationship, and she never has answered the question.
So ... women are separate from people? You think the mental and physical are equivalent? You really do think men should mistreat and disrespect women?
Like I said, a pattern develops; that last about mistreating and disrespecting women seems like a sentence that didn't come out quite the way you intended, but then you followed it up with the bit that held women and people as separate groups. You assert that sex and emotional support are equivalent obligations. Are you qualified to make that assertion? How many times have you been penetrated? How many times has a man ejaculated inside you? Or on you? Or in your mouth? None? Why not? Do you think you could withstand a half-hour of rutting from the receiving end three-hundred times a year? How about one hundred eighty? Fifty-two? After all, your comparison suggests quite clearly that the sexual act is the same for both partners.
And the suggestion that your love for another human being depends on your sexual satisfaction, constitutes an obligation to your sexual satisfaction, is problematic. Certainly, you can find partners who will fulfill that standard, but they will more often or not require greater psychological and emotional investment on your part.
For the most part, I think I get what you're saying. I just disagree. And we should expect that there will be others who seem to understand what you're saying and are more sympathetic. The contextual themes of your argument are hardly unique.
Mikenostic said:
Now you're just reaching.
Yes, it takes two to have sex.
Don't pretend it's the same thing for each person, though.
You know, colloquialism and stereotype are just fine for a sympathetic joke between men. But they don't make for a proper argument about the reality of interpersonal relationships. They're mere stereotypes.
Because the mental and physical aren't the same. I would have thought this is obvious, but thank you for correcting me on that gross error.
The proper comparison would be that a woman demanding constant emotional support can give none. And, yes, I've been through that before, too. Some people are just like that.
Actually, I think you're wrong on that. You could not have very easily put up with it to keep getting laid, else you would have.
Maybe if you had come up with something other than the gold-digger stereotype, I could take that point more seriously.
Because you're right. People endure discomfort in exchange for things they want. Most people, for instance, hate their jobs. At least, it seems that way. Yet they get up and go to work and do at least enough to stay employed because they want the money.
But, to use my former partner as an example, I have no idea what it was she was getting out of the relationship. Sure as hell wasn't money. She lied to me to stay in it even while she didn't like me as a person and didn't like having sex with me. And like I said elsewhere, nobody should have to feel that way just to get laid, or whatever. Seriously, I don't understand what it was she got out of the relationship, and she never has answered the question.
So ... women are separate from people? You think the mental and physical are equivalent? You really do think men should mistreat and disrespect women?
Like I said, a pattern develops; that last about mistreating and disrespecting women seems like a sentence that didn't come out quite the way you intended, but then you followed it up with the bit that held women and people as separate groups. You assert that sex and emotional support are equivalent obligations. Are you qualified to make that assertion? How many times have you been penetrated? How many times has a man ejaculated inside you? Or on you? Or in your mouth? None? Why not? Do you think you could withstand a half-hour of rutting from the receiving end three-hundred times a year? How about one hundred eighty? Fifty-two? After all, your comparison suggests quite clearly that the sexual act is the same for both partners.
And the suggestion that your love for another human being depends on your sexual satisfaction, constitutes an obligation to your sexual satisfaction, is problematic. Certainly, you can find partners who will fulfill that standard, but they will more often or not require greater psychological and emotional investment on your part.
For the most part, I think I get what you're saying. I just disagree. And we should expect that there will be others who seem to understand what you're saying and are more sympathetic. The contextual themes of your argument are hardly unique.
Last edited:
)