100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: One man's prude is another man's principled person | |
|---|---|
|
Edited by
Unknow
on
Thu 03/14/13 05:28 PM
|
 Define "no fun and uptight".
There is no universal definition for that. Like beauty, it's in the eye of the beholder. What one person sees as "no fun" or "uptight" another will find to be exactly what they want. Some things really *are* subjective. Plenty of women are capable of having fun without having to "put out" sexually. Sex may be fun, but "fun" doesn't require sex. So, how does one decide whether or not a woman is "fun"? one way of telling is when she mentions that the chandelier on her bedroom ceiling has been ripped out ...... again 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Define "no fun and uptight".
There is no universal definition for that. Like beauty, it's in the eye of the beholder. What one person sees as "no fun" or "uptight" another will find to be exactly what they want. Some things really *are* subjective. Plenty of women are capable of having fun without having to "put out" sexually. Sex may be fun, but "fun" doesn't require sex. So, how does one decide whether or not a woman is "fun"? That's going to be something that's different for everyone. What's fun to someone else may not be fun to you. So, you'll have to make that decision on your own. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Okay, at this point I have to ask: Why do you keep insisting that everyone has to adhere to the same standards YOU do?
I am not doing that. I am doing the opposite. Let's go back to the beginning of the OP: In another thread I put forward the proposition that in a dating situation you can raise the subject of sex to find out how much of a prude you are dealing with. I do this in order to find out how much fun someone is. It is a compatibility issue. I don't really get on with women that are no fun and uptight.
If the alleged issue in the above-quoted statement is sexual compatibility, then the statement contains excessive wording. Here is the same statement re-worded in order to remove the unnecessary verbiage. "In a dating situation you can raise the subject of sex to find out if the other person is sexually compatible with you." In my re-wording of the OP, I state the issue in an objective way. The original version contains language that is subjective and judgmental. TheFreeDictionary.com gives the following history of the word prude: Being called a prude is rarely considered a compliment, but if we dig into the history of the word prude, we find that it has a noble past. The change for the worse took place in French. French prude first had a good sense, "wise woman," but apparently a woman could be too wise or, in the eyes of some, too observant of decorum and propriety. Thus prude took on the sense in French that was brought into English along with the word, first recorded in 1704. The French word prude was a shortened form of prude femme (earlier in Old French prode femme), a word modeled on earlier preudomme, "a man of experience and integrity." The second part of this word is, of course, homme, "man." Old French prod, meaning "wise, prudent," is from Vulgar Latin prdis with the same sense. Prdis in turn comes from Late Latin prde, "advantageous," derived from the verb prdesse, "to be good." Despite this history filled with usefulness, profit, wisdom, and integrity, prude has become a term of reproach.
Notice the last sentence in the above-quoted word history: "...prude has become a term of reproach." The use of the word prude in the OP is a case of "poisoning the well", implying that there is something wrong with a woman if she does not meet the sexual standards desired by the writer. The fact that a woman is not sexually compatible with a man doesn't mean that there is anything wrong with the woman. To use an analogy, the fact that water and oil do not mix doesn't mean there is something wrong with either the oil or the water. Furthermore, the OP says, "I do this in order to find out how much fun someone is. It is a compatibility issue. I don't really get on with women that are no fun and uptight." While sex is fun, sex is not a requirement for fun. Two adults can have fun with each other without one of them "putting out" sexually for the other. Plenty of women have fun while dating men without the women having to participate in sex. A single woman shouldn't have to have sex with a man in order for that woman to be considered acceptable. If a single woman chooses to have sex for the sake of her pleasure, then fine. More power to her. However, there is nothing wrong with the woman if she doesn't make that choice. For the sake of argument, suppose that the OP had said this: "In another thread I put forward the proposition that in a dating situation you can raise the subject of sex to find out how much of a slut you are dealing with." Like the word prude, the word slut is a term of reproach, which is why I am opposed to anyone calling a woman a slut. If the OP had used the word slut instead of the word prude, then would the OP have been given a pass by the women on this site? I seriously doubt it. A single woman isn't a slut because she chooses to be sexually active. Likewise, a single woman isn't a prude because she chooses to remain celibate while she is single. In no case should a man belittle a woman because she doesn't share his beliefs about sex. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dodo, no matter what term you use, or how you want to discuss it, it's still going to be different for everyone. Fun for you may not involve sex. Fun for someone else may. If they're looking for that particular kind of fun, what's wrong with that?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dodo, no matter what term you use, or how you want to discuss it, it's still going to be different for everyone. Fun for you may not involve sex. Fun for someone else may. If they're looking for that particular kind of fun, what's wrong with that? I did not say that it's wrong for a man to seek that kind of fun. However, a man can seek that kind of fun without using a term of reproach to describe a woman who doesn't share his idea of what fun is. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dodo, no matter what term you use, or how you want to discuss it, it's still going to be different for everyone. Fun for you may not involve sex. Fun for someone else may. If they're looking for that particular kind of fun, what's wrong with that? I did not say that it's wrong for a man to seek that kind of fun. However, a man can seek that kind of fun without using a term of reproach to describe a woman who doesn't share his idea of what fun is. I get that. You can lecture all you want, though, and it's not going to change what people think. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dodo, no matter what term you use, or how you want to discuss it, it's still going to be different for everyone. Fun for you may not involve sex. Fun for someone else may. If they're looking for that particular kind of fun, what's wrong with that? I did not say that it's wrong for a man to seek that kind of fun. However, a man can seek that kind of fun without using a term of reproach to describe a woman who doesn't share his idea of what fun is. I get that. You can lecture all you want, though, and it's not going to change what people think. In the past, you challenged me to speak up if a man says something sexist about a woman. That is what I have been doing on this thread. A sexist slur was used to describe a woman. So, I spoke against its use. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I never said you can't speak out against something that bothers you. I was just giving my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I never said you can't speak out against something that bothers you. I was just giving my opinion. I am thankful that you did. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Okay, at this point I have to ask: Why do you keep insisting that everyone has to adhere to the same standards YOU do?
I am not doing that. I am doing the opposite. Let's go back to the beginning of the OP: In another thread I put forward the proposition that in a dating situation you can raise the subject of sex to find out how much of a prude you are dealing with. I do this in order to find out how much fun someone is. It is a compatibility issue. I don't really get on with women that are no fun and uptight.
If the alleged issue in the above-quoted statement is sexual compatibility, then the statement contains excessive wording. Here is the same statement re-worded in order to remove the unnecessary verbiage. "In a dating situation you can raise the subject of sex to find out if the other person is sexually compatible with you." In my re-wording of the OP, I state the issue in an objective way. The original version contains language that is subjective and judgmental. TheFreeDictionary.com gives the following history of the word prude: Being called a prude is rarely considered a compliment, but if we dig into the history of the word prude, we find that it has a noble past. The change for the worse took place in French. French prude first had a good sense, "wise woman," but apparently a woman could be too wise or, in the eyes of some, too observant of decorum and propriety. Thus prude took on the sense in French that was brought into English along with the word, first recorded in 1704. The French word prude was a shortened form of prude femme (earlier in Old French prode femme), a word modeled on earlier preudomme, "a man of experience and integrity." The second part of this word is, of course, homme, "man." Old French prod, meaning "wise, prudent," is from Vulgar Latin prdis with the same sense. Prdis in turn comes from Late Latin prde, "advantageous," derived from the verb prdesse, "to be good." Despite this history filled with usefulness, profit, wisdom, and integrity, prude has become a term of reproach.
Notice the last sentence in the above-quoted word history: "...prude has become a term of reproach." The use of the word prude in the OP is a case of "poisoning the well", implying that there is something wrong with a woman if she does not meet the sexual standards desired by the writer. The fact that a woman is not sexually compatible with a man doesn't mean that there is anything wrong with the woman. To use an analogy, the fact that water and oil do not mix doesn't mean there is something wrong with either the oil or the water. Furthermore, the OP says, "I do this in order to find out how much fun someone is. It is a compatibility issue. I don't really get on with women that are no fun and uptight." While sex is fun, sex is not a requirement for fun. Two adults can have fun with each other without one of them "putting out" sexually for the other. Plenty of women have fun while dating men without the women having to participate in sex. A single woman shouldn't have to have sex with a man in order for that woman to be considered acceptable. If a single woman chooses to have sex for the sake of her pleasure, then fine. More power to her. However, there is nothing wrong with the woman if she doesn't make that choice. For the sake of argument, suppose that the OP had said this: "In another thread I put forward the proposition that in a dating situation you can raise the subject of sex to find out how much of a slut you are dealing with." Like the word prude, the word slut is a term of reproach, which is why I am opposed to anyone calling a woman a slut. If the OP had used the word slut instead of the word prude, then would the OP have been given a pass by the women on this site? I seriously doubt it. A single woman isn't a slut because she chooses to be sexually active. Likewise, a single woman isn't a prude because she chooses to remain celibate while she is single. In no case should a man belittle a woman because she doesn't share his beliefs about sex. I concur!! Talking about sex too soon,gets me to wear my running shoes faster than not! When you talk with a man/woman of intrest,these topics flow in when you are both comfortable with each other,otherwise,most women will read you as just looking for sex......i mean; ''Oh,by the way,whats your fav sexual position??'' asked on a second date??? OUCH!! Well,if the woman you talk with is just for intimate encounters,then that topic should be discussed before 1st date(which i doubt Tawt is looking for)!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"What's the matter with you? Are you a prude or what?"... I remember hearing this kind of stuff when I went on dates in high school. (Way back in the 1960's.)...Guys used manipulation tactics to try to pressure girls into having sex...Thank goodness all the guys I dated weren't like this...My husband wasn't like this when we met (as adults) in the early 80's. He wasn't trying to "score" with me. (And get me into "bed" right off the bat.)...My husband "won" my heart because I felt safe with him. He didn't view women as "sex objects" or "toys."...And I was a single-parent mom at the time with 2 small sons. I tried to be careful about the men I dated and brought into our home...I'm alone now. (My husband and both my sons passed-away.) I'm trying to make "wise choices" when it comes to my life. (So I won't end-up stepping in too much "doo-doo.")...If dating involves "automatic sex" these days then I just won't date. It's not my "thing."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is so true Don and I happen to lean toward Twat's reasoning about and reasons for talking about sex...I don't think he is being picky, just practical and proactive ...When I was young, very young, I didn't discuss it because I didn't know how...I was intimidated and I didn't want to appear stupid or ill informed (which I was!!  )...In todays world, R rated communication is a given...Talking about it in small intimate groups with close friends is not a problem as long as it is not the only topic and it is talked about intelligently and with respect to current circumstances of all present....As for talking about it in a relationship, I consider it a positive component to achieving a healthy relationship prior to, during, post intimacy...Obviously, how and when sex is discussed would be different in each relationship...
Who said what?  
Bout time someone noticed! ...Not surprised it was you
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dodo, no matter what term you use, or how you want to discuss it, it's still going to be different for everyone. Fun for you may not involve sex. Fun for someone else may. If they're looking for that particular kind of fun, what's wrong with that? I did not say that it's wrong for a man to seek that kind of fun. However, a man can seek that kind of fun without using a term of reproach to describe a woman who doesn't share his idea of what fun is. I get that. You can lecture all you want, though, and it's not going to change what people think. In the past, you challenged me to speak up if a man says something sexist about a woman. That is what I have been doing on this thread. A sexist slur was used to describe a woman. So, I spoke against its use. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In another thread I put forward the proposition that in a dating situation you can raise the subject of sex to find out how much of a prude you are dealing with. I do this in order to find out how much fun someone is. It is a compatibility issue. I don't really get on with women that are no fun and uptight. If a person has hangups about sex it might be argued that this is because they have principles and that they do not consider it to be an appropriate topic of conversation but this is why it is important to only bring the topic up when you think that it is appropriate to do so. I am making the claim that it is appropriate to bring up the topic in a dating situation to find out how much fun somebody is. Am I being too picky? You might need a sexorcism.
sexorcism A religious ceremony created to forever banish sexual activity from human experience. See marriage He felt the otherworldly power of the sexorcism the moment she said "I do". Dude, if you believe that marriage diminishes sexual activity, then you must have had a bad marital experience. My late wife and I had a very active sex life with each other. Good point. And I like how you use the word "Late".  As the "Later" wife and me did have an ideal sexual active relationship. I feel like I should apologize for my humour. But then humour is about all I got going for me sometimes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[ Good point. And I like how you use the word "Late". As the "Later" wife and me did have an ideal sexual active relationship. I feel like I should apologize for my humour. But then humour is about all I got going for me sometimes.
Hey Roy  ...Sorry to interrupt, but I gotta say...Great pic!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you, Leigh. I love wearing scrubs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In a dating situation you can raise the subject of sex to find out how much of a prude you are dealing with. I do this in order to find out how much fun someone is. It is a compatibility issue. I don't really get on with women that are no fun and uptight. I am making the claim that it is appropriate to bring up the topic in a dating situation to find out how much fun somebody is. Am I being too picky? Sex is a compatibility issue. You go for it...ask all you want. But don't get mad and start bad mouthing the people who don't share your values and opinions. Look at it as a good way to weed out the people who are not interested in the same things you are. I listen and hear what is being said whenever I come in contact with people (male or female), most often I find we have nothing in common to invest my time and energy in. So I move on, don't need people just to have people around me. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In another thread I put forward the proposition that in a dating situation you can raise the subject of sex to find out how much of a prude you are dealing with. I do this in order to find out how much fun someone is. It is a compatibility issue. I don't really get on with women that are no fun and uptight. If a person has hangups about sex it might be argued that this is because they have principles and that they do not consider it to be an appropriate topic of conversation but this is why it is important to only bring the topic up when you think that it is appropriate to do so. I am making the claim that it is appropriate to bring up the topic in a dating situation to find out how much fun somebody is. Am I being too picky? You might need a sexorcism.
sexorcism A religious ceremony created to forever banish sexual activity from human experience. See marriage He felt the otherworldly power of the sexorcism the moment she said "I do". Dude, if you believe that marriage diminishes sexual activity, then you must have had a bad marital experience. My late wife and I had a very active sex life with each other. Good point. And I like how you use the word "Late". As the "Later" wife and me did have an ideal sexual active relationship. I feel like I should apologize for my humour. But then humour is about all I got going for me sometimes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In another thread I put forward the proposition that in a dating situation you can raise the subject of sex to find out how much of a prude you are dealing with. I do this in order to find out how much fun someone is. It is a compatibility issue. I don't really get on with women that are no fun and uptight. If a person has hangups about sex it might be argued that this is because they have principles and that they do not consider it to be an appropriate topic of conversation but this is why it is important to only bring the topic up when you think that it is appropriate to do so. I am making the claim that it is appropriate to bring up the topic in a dating situation to find out how much fun somebody is. Am I being too picky? Not too picky at all. Being picky isn't always a bad thing. Imagine how many mistakes one could avoid by being picky.
You might need a sexorcism.
sexorcism A religious ceremony created to forever banish sexual activity from human experience. See marriage He felt the otherworldly power of the sexorcism the moment she said "I do". Dude, if you believe that marriage diminishes sexual activity, then you must have had a bad marital experience. My late wife and I had a very active sex life with each other. Good point. And I like how you use the word "Late". As the "Later" wife and me did have an ideal sexual active relationship. I feel like I should apologize for my humour. But then humour is about all I got going for me sometimes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Right greeneyes.
|
|
|
|
|
