Good choices can come about by being picky.

I don't think that it's sexist of me to call someone a prude. I could think that someone of either gender is a prude. Would it be sexist for a woman to say that she thought that a man was a bit of a prude?

It works both ways. Women will often bring up the topic and ask me if I mind them talking about whatever it is. Are they being sexist by trying to find out if I am a prude?

It is a compatibility issue. As I am not a prude I will get on better with someone that is also not a prude. If someone is a prude they will get on better with other prudes.

It is of course a subjective judgement that I make but as I do not consider myself to be a prude I believe that I can make a judgement as to how much of a prude someone else is. Also, if someone is a prude themselves they will want to find out how much of a prude they are dealing with in a dating situation. The only difference is that they won't see it that way because they are a prude and they won't see being a prude as a problem.

I don't think you should even feel a need to explain your choice of the word prude, Tawt...Read in context, your meaning is clear and clearly not sexist..

I don't really have a problem with someone calling someone a prude. I don't see it as being sexist, either.

If a man simply wants to find a woman who is sexually compatible with him, then that is all he needs to say. He doesn't have to use a negative term to describe a woman who isn't compatible.

The word prude is indeed a negative term. As GreenEyes48 has pointed out, the word is used by men to belittle a woman who is sexually conservative.

Suppose that a man were to say, "I am looking for a woman who isn't a slut." Would you object to the use of the word slut to describe a woman who is sexually liberal? I suspect that you would object, because the word slut is used to belittle a woman who is sexually liberal.

Has it become acceptable to belittle a woman who is sexually conservative but not a woman who is sexually liberal?

There are some respectable men, that respect a woman, who does not feel the need to have Sex in a dating relationship.

FWIW, I have not objected to a man wanting to have sex in a dating relationship. I have objected to a man belittling a woman because she doesn't want to have sex in a dating relationship.

I know! And, for a Man to belittle her, he is not a Respectable Man.

FWIW, I would also object to a man belittling a woman because she is sexually liberal. When it comes to misogyny, I do not want to use a double-standard.

Go back and read your own posts. It's *exactly* what you're doing. You're telling other people that they aren't allowed to define their own standard for what's "fun" and that they all should use yours. It doesn't work that way, dude.

No one here is suggesting that you or anyone you know must adopt their definition of words like "prude" or "fun". So where do you get off telling us that we have to adopt yours?

Here's a suggestion: If the idea of other people having a different standard for what's fun or not is so bothersome to you, then maybe you should just avoid these particular threads once you see that's what they're about. I mean, no one's making you participate.

Though I will note, and you may take this however you like, for someone who thinks sex and whatever pertains to it doesn't belong in casual conversation, you certainly engage in more of what could be taken as innuendo on the goofing-around threads than what I'd expect. Now, I'm not one to bring up the subject of forked tongues and hypocrisy, but a word to the wise: You just might want to engage in a bit of self-examination rather than preaching to everybody else.

By the way, when you're not on your soapbox about standards, you seem like a decent guy. So maybe just relax a bit, and let others talk about what they want?

The OP uses a negative term to describe a woman who doesn't fit one man's definition of a fun person. I am objecting to the use of a negative term to describe a woman.

Wow! It's starting to feel like a sports event or a boxing-ring or ?? (With "opposing sides.")...I think it's good to have a full-blown discussion about all of it. (From all "sides.")

I am a man. DUH!

If I'm just looking for companionship and/or getting laid, I ain't all that picky. I'm too fugly to be.

Now, when it comes to settling in with a gal, I'd only settle in with someone like that there sweet, little Ms Leigh.

She's class, sensual, soft, sexy and all woman.

And I wouldn't doubt she's a one-man woman.

I'm just going to say something here, and people may pick it apart, or throw rocks, or whatever else they want to do about it. They can even ignore it as tl;dr if they like. (I promise not to be offended by that.) But I think it bears saying, so here goes:

I'm new around here and most people don't know much about me, so let me explain that I'm a writer. Words and their uses are my stock-in-trade. I love them dearly, and I try to use them carefully. I've been this way for as long as I can remember, and that's a long time. I've been writing for at least thirty-five years and I've been a language geek even longer than that.

I can tell you this much: Words like "prude" and "fun" will conjure a different meaning in the mind of nearly every person who reads, speaks or hears them. They're subjective concepts. A dictionary can lay out any number of meanings for them, but each person will have their own interpretation of what the word means *to that person*. And that's okay, as long as everyone involved in a discussion recognizes this.

To someone like Dodo, "prude" may mean an insulting epithet. To someone like me, or some of the other posters on this thread, it's just a descriptive term for people given to certain types of behavior. I won't say the word doesn't carry negative connotations; it's loaded with them in at least one accepted definition. HOWEVER, when it isn't being hurled at someone as an personal insult or label, it pays to step back and just consider casual, common usage. It's a perfectly acceptable word when used simply AS A WORD. And yes, it can apply equally to men and women, and no, it isn't always or automatically a term of belittlement.

Now we come to the subjects of sex and fun, as related to attitudes toward women. In case no one's noticed, I'm a woman. Not only am I a woman, but I consider myself a feminist. I see myself as the equal to any man in self-determination, human worth, and the right to own my thoughts and actions. I am also a sexual being, and I make my own decisions about engaging in sex. I have owned those decisions since the very first time (yes, it was my idea), and will continue to do so because I am my own person.

When a man brings up the topic of sex with me --or I with him-- I don't see it as pressure; I see it as a way of discovering how compatible we are, just as with discussing preferences in music or hobbies or our philosophical beliefs. Sex falls on the same spectrum of human experience, and just as I might not have fun dating a man whose philosophical or political beliefs were at too great a variance with my own, or whose taste in music or what to do on weekends was greatly mismatched with mine, so would I hesitate to continue dating one whose sexual attitudes were too different from mine.

My personal definition of "prudery" would be an unwillingness to even discuss the topic of sex without passing judgment on it in some capacity. There's nothing inherently sexist in that, as it can apply equally to both sexes.

Oh, and my definition of "fun"? Engaging in mutually agreed-upon activities with someone whose attitudes align well with my own, and in an atmosphere of shared respect.

For those who've taken the time to read all this, I thank you for your indulgence. We now return you to your regularly-scheduled debate.

Before I can accept that definition, I'd need to know what you mean by "sexually liberal". Because *I* am sexually liberal, and to me the word "slut" means someone --- man OR woman -- who sleeps with anything that has the proper equipment and a pulse, with no regard to whether either of them may be in another relationship or disease-free or whatever else. I'm sexually liberal, but I'm not a slut. And yes, I have known women AND men I would consider slutty.


I'm still trying to figure out when these words became exclusive to women, because if that's the case I seriously missed a memo from the Language Bureau.

Men and women definitely have trouble relating to each other at times. (Due to the programming and conditioning we receive when we're growing-up.)....It's a big job (in itself) to find some "common ground" with members of the opposite sex and understand their "reality."...Sure we all have the ability to have sex. But personally I don't want to add sex to the "mix" until I find some "common ground." (Because this might complicate things. At least for me anyway.)...The divorce rate keeps going up and relationships don't always last very long anymore... The freedom and ability to have sex doesn't seem to help men and women stay together. Or find ways to work-through their problems.

I honestly think the problems in that regard aren't related so much to sexual freedom as to the fact that we've now created a society in which both genders have options for what to do in life (women are no longer expected just to get married and be stay-at-home wives/mothers dependent on men for their living), so the idea of marriage is now predicated on mutual love and compatibility rather than on duty.

Personally, I think that's a preferable state of affairs to what existed before, but we're still working our way through all of the cultural effects that go along with it. It's taken a couple of generations already, and there's no reason to necessarily expect that the end result will resemble what preceded the shift.

To me,the word 'PRINCIPLED' in the topic title seems inappropriate.
rather 'well-behaved' or 'well-mannered' would hv been suitable.

One not thinking or talking about sex doesn't necessarily mean that he is principled.

To me,the word 'PRINCIPLED' in the topic title seems inappropriate.
rather 'well-behaved' or 'well-mannered' would hv been suitable.

One not thinking or talking about sex doesn't necessarily mean that he is principled.

The use of "principled" in the topic header is a reference to a post someone else made on a related thread. That's (probably) the only reason it's there, although I can't speak for TawtStrat, who began this particular thread.