100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Promiscuity | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
What is the point of arguing about promiscuity if the ones arguing haven't agreed as to what the definition of "promiscuous" is? Promiscuous - Having casual sexual relations frequently with different partners; indiscriminate in the choice of sexual partners So basically, sluts or whores. Both male and female.. Uh, the dictionary definition says nothing about promiscuous people being sluts or whores. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is the point of arguing about promiscuity if the ones arguing haven't agreed as to what the definition of "promiscuous" is? Promiscuous - Having casual sexual relations frequently with different partners; indiscriminate in the choice of sexual partners So basically, sluts or whores. Both male and female.. WWJD? Probably take you to the last supper... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is the point of arguing about promiscuity if the ones arguing haven't agreed as to what the definition of "promiscuous" is? Promiscuous - Having casual sexual relations frequently with different partners; indiscriminate in the choice of sexual partners So basically, sluts or whores. Both male and female.. Uh, the dictionary definition says nothing about promiscuous people being sluts or whores. Ironically the first definition of slut says totally opposite of what you said. Now the definition is a bit sexist, ladies please don't take it that way. We are discussing on a general note for both male and female. slut - A woman considered sexually promiscuous Ah whore is more of a "general" term whore - A person considered sexually promiscuous. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is the point of arguing about promiscuity if the ones arguing haven't agreed as to what the definition of "promiscuous" is? Promiscuous - Having casual sexual relations frequently with different partners; indiscriminate in the choice of sexual partners So basically, sluts or whores. Both male and female.. Uh, the dictionary definition says nothing about promiscuous people being sluts or whores. Ironically the first definition of slut says totally opposite of what you said. Now the definition is a bit sexist, ladies please don't take it that way. We are discussing on a general note for both male and female. slut - A woman considered sexually promiscuous Ah whore is more of a "general" term whore - A person considered sexually promiscuous. Mary did you know??? Look, I was in Singapore and only went in for a massage I swear! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I mean yeah it's a great way to share that love with your partner. But for the love in itself it has no connection to the sex. The sex won't make you fall in love, nor make the other fall in love. Nor make the love stronger. It potentially makes the relationship strong through sharing the love that already exists through the sex. But again the sex in itself doesn't cause, make, or anything specific with the love in itself. you just made a connection. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Do you believe men and women who are promiscuous (go with lust and not feelings when they sleep around) have abandonment issues from their parents? Sleeping around with multiple sex partners doesn't necessarily indicate "abandonment issues from their parents". People can sleep around simply because they crave sex. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I mean yeah it's a great way to share that love with your partner. But for the love in itself it has no connection to the sex. The sex won't make you fall in love, nor make the other fall in love. Nor make the love stronger. It potentially makes the relationship strong through sharing the love that already exists through the sex. But again the sex in itself doesn't cause, make, or anything specific with the love in itself. you just made a connection. POTENTIALLY. Does not mean it does. There are plenty other ways to share your love that is safer and more efficient. It's not the sex in itself, it's the feeling of being "special", set out from the other guys/girls, treated differently. Again can be accomplished through other actions because again it isn't the sex in itself that causes the love. So no, there isn't a connection lol. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Do you believe men and women who are promiscuous (go with lust and not feelings when they sleep around) have abandonment issues from their parents? Sleeping around with multiple sex partners doesn't necessarily indicate "abandonment issues from their parents". People can sleep around simply because they crave sex. Absolutely true, as I see I'm discussing from a younger age group then most to all of you. And I can tell you from my age group of people, it's the craving sex. It's like a plague infecting the country and possibly most likely the world I assume and not just the USA. Every woman I've encountered on the level of dating pushes towards a sexual relation, almost immediately and even on the first day of meeting, in like a bar or club, or something of that such. If I didn't like billiards so much, I would stop going to bars or clubs as the only reason is seems people my age go to either one of those is to "hook up". |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I mean yeah it's a great way to share that love with your partner. But for the love in itself it has no connection to the sex. The sex won't make you fall in love, nor make the other fall in love. Nor make the love stronger. It potentially makes the relationship strong through sharing the love that already exists through the sex. But again the sex in itself doesn't cause, make, or anything specific with the love in itself. you just made a connection. POTENTIALLY. Does not mean it does. There are plenty other ways to share your love that is safer and more efficient. It's not the sex in itself, it's the feeling of being "special", set out from the other guys/girls, treated differently. Again can be accomplished through other actions because again it isn't the sex in itself that causes the love. So no, there isn't a connection lol. i do know what potentially means, thank you. it also means that it 'can', so you cannot have it both ways. people use it to get it. whether or not it does is inconsequential, it is something that people connect together. so yes, there is most definitely is a connection. if sex, as you suggest, is a way to share your love with someone, than you have made yet another connection. but i won't point that out, that way you don't have to explain to me how using these other methods you elude to are connected with love, but the act of making love isn't. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I mean yeah it's a great way to share that love with your partner. But for the love in itself it has no connection to the sex. The sex won't make you fall in love, nor make the other fall in love. Nor make the love stronger. It potentially makes the relationship strong through sharing the love that already exists through the sex. But again the sex in itself doesn't cause, make, or anything specific with the love in itself. you just made a connection. POTENTIALLY. Does not mean it does. There are plenty other ways to share your love that is safer and more efficient. It's not the sex in itself, it's the feeling of being "special", set out from the other guys/girls, treated differently. Again can be accomplished through other actions because again it isn't the sex in itself that causes the love. So no, there isn't a connection lol. i do know what potentially means, thank you. it also means that it 'can', so you cannot have it both ways. people use it to get it. whether or not it does is inconsequential, it is something that people connect together. so yes, there is most definitely is a connection. if sex, as you suggest, is a way to share your love with someone, than you have made yet another connection. but i won't point that out, that way you don't have to explain to me how using these other methods you elude to are connected with love, but the act of making love isn't. Well thanks for defending having sex so strongly. But my original point was you don't HAVE to have the sex to have the love. And just because the sex is there, does not mean the love is. That is what I ment by there is no connection between the two, as in it is not a have to for either or. You have one without the other. People will use the word "love" to get sex. Which again is entirely false pretense, for again you don't have to have sex to have love nor does the sex thereof create the love. It "can" intensify the feeling of love or the connection thereof. But does not have to be to have that connection, can be found other ways that are even a stronger connection then the sex. But again, thanks for defending the sex so enthusiastically. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I mean yeah it's a great way to share that love with your partner. But for the love in itself it has no connection to the sex. The sex won't make you fall in love, nor make the other fall in love. Nor make the love stronger. It potentially makes the relationship strong through sharing the love that already exists through the sex. But again the sex in itself doesn't cause, make, or anything specific with the love in itself. you just made a connection. POTENTIALLY. Does not mean it does. There are plenty other ways to share your love that is safer and more efficient. It's not the sex in itself, it's the feeling of being "special", set out from the other guys/girls, treated differently. Again can be accomplished through other actions because again it isn't the sex in itself that causes the love. So no, there isn't a connection lol. i do know what potentially means, thank you. it also means that it 'can', so you cannot have it both ways. people use it to get it. whether or not it does is inconsequential, it is something that people connect together. so yes, there is most definitely is a connection. if sex, as you suggest, is a way to share your love with someone, than you have made yet another connection. but i won't point that out, that way you don't have to explain to me how using these other methods you elude to are connected with love, but the act of making love isn't. Well thanks for defending having sex so strongly. But my original point was you don't HAVE to have the sex to have the love. And just because the sex is there, does not mean the love is. That is what I ment by there is no connection between the two, as in it is not a have to for either or. You have one without the other. People will use the word "love" to get sex. Which again is entirely false pretense, for again you don't have to have sex to have love nor does the sex thereof create the love. It "can" intensify the feeling of love or the connection thereof. But does not have to be to have that connection, can be found other ways that are even a stronger connection then the sex. But again, thanks for defending the sex so enthusiastically. And the original context/meaning of the discussion wasn't on "sex" in general, was on promiscuous. Which again is along the lines of sluts or whores. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I mean yeah it's a great way to share that love with your partner. But for the love in itself it has no connection to the sex. The sex won't make you fall in love, nor make the other fall in love. Nor make the love stronger. It potentially makes the relationship strong through sharing the love that already exists through the sex. But again the sex in itself doesn't cause, make, or anything specific with the love in itself. you just made a connection. POTENTIALLY. Does not mean it does. There are plenty other ways to share your love that is safer and more efficient. It's not the sex in itself, it's the feeling of being "special", set out from the other guys/girls, treated differently. Again can be accomplished through other actions because again it isn't the sex in itself that causes the love. So no, there isn't a connection lol. i do know what potentially means, thank you. it also means that it 'can', so you cannot have it both ways. people use it to get it. whether or not it does is inconsequential, it is something that people connect together. so yes, there is most definitely is a connection. if sex, as you suggest, is a way to share your love with someone, than you have made yet another connection. but i won't point that out, that way you don't have to explain to me how using these other methods you elude to are connected with love, but the act of making love isn't. Well thanks for defending having sex so strongly. But my original point was you don't HAVE to have the sex to have the love. And just because the sex is there, does not mean the love is. That is what I ment by there is no connection between the two, as in it is not a have to for either or. You have one without the other. People will use the word "love" to get sex. Which again is entirely false pretense, for again you don't have to have sex to have love nor does the sex thereof create the love. It "can" intensify the feeling of love or the connection thereof. But does not have to be to have that connection, can be found other ways that are even a stronger connection then the sex. But again, thanks for defending the sex so enthusiastically. not only do I completely agree with your first statement, but I do not trust men who go on and on about sex and defend it "enthusiastically"...smells me Playah |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I mean yeah it's a great way to share that love with your partner. But for the love in itself it has no connection to the sex. The sex won't make you fall in love, nor make the other fall in love. Nor make the love stronger. It potentially makes the relationship strong through sharing the love that already exists through the sex. But again the sex in itself doesn't cause, make, or anything specific with the love in itself. you just made a connection. POTENTIALLY. Does not mean it does. There are plenty other ways to share your love that is safer and more efficient. It's not the sex in itself, it's the feeling of being "special", set out from the other guys/girls, treated differently. Again can be accomplished through other actions because again it isn't the sex in itself that causes the love. So no, there isn't a connection lol. i do know what potentially means, thank you. it also means that it 'can', so you cannot have it both ways. people use it to get it. whether or not it does is inconsequential, it is something that people connect together. so yes, there is most definitely is a connection. if sex, as you suggest, is a way to share your love with someone, than you have made yet another connection. but i won't point that out, that way you don't have to explain to me how using these other methods you elude to are connected with love, but the act of making love isn't. Well thanks for defending having sex so strongly. But my original point was you don't HAVE to have the sex to have the love. And just because the sex is there, does not mean the love is. That is what I ment by there is no connection between the two, as in it is not a have to for either or. You have one without the other. People will use the word "love" to get sex. Which again is entirely false pretense, for again you don't have to have sex to have love nor does the sex thereof create the love. It "can" intensify the feeling of love or the connection thereof. But does not have to be to have that connection, can be found other ways that are even a stronger connection then the sex. But again, thanks for defending the sex so enthusiastically. well thanks for not being a condescending jerk..... at no point have i defended having sex. what i am defending is that fact that the two are connected. just because they don't necessarily rely on each other, a point of yours in which i do agree, does in no way, shape or form make them mutually exclusive. ohhh again, thanks for not being a condescending jerk. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I mean yeah it's a great way to share that love with your partner. But for the love in itself it has no connection to the sex. The sex won't make you fall in love, nor make the other fall in love. Nor make the love stronger. It potentially makes the relationship strong through sharing the love that already exists through the sex. But again the sex in itself doesn't cause, make, or anything specific with the love in itself. you just made a connection. POTENTIALLY. Does not mean it does. There are plenty other ways to share your love that is safer and more efficient. It's not the sex in itself, it's the feeling of being "special", set out from the other guys/girls, treated differently. Again can be accomplished through other actions because again it isn't the sex in itself that causes the love. So no, there isn't a connection lol. i do know what potentially means, thank you. it also means that it 'can', so you cannot have it both ways. people use it to get it. whether or not it does is inconsequential, it is something that people connect together. so yes, there is most definitely is a connection. if sex, as you suggest, is a way to share your love with someone, than you have made yet another connection. but i won't point that out, that way you don't have to explain to me how using these other methods you elude to are connected with love, but the act of making love isn't. Well thanks for defending having sex so strongly. But my original point was you don't HAVE to have the sex to have the love. And just because the sex is there, does not mean the love is. That is what I ment by there is no connection between the two, as in it is not a have to for either or. You have one without the other. People will use the word "love" to get sex. Which again is entirely false pretense, for again you don't have to have sex to have love nor does the sex thereof create the love. It "can" intensify the feeling of love or the connection thereof. But does not have to be to have that connection, can be found other ways that are even a stronger connection then the sex. But again, thanks for defending the sex so enthusiastically. not only do I completely agree with your first statement, but I do not trust men who go on and on about sex and defend it "enthusiastically"...smells me Playah seriously? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When I fall in love (if ever) with a man (singular) you best believe there will be some private intimacy in both of our favors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I mean yeah it's a great way to share that love with your partner. But for the love in itself it has no connection to the sex. The sex won't make you fall in love, nor make the other fall in love. Nor make the love stronger. It potentially makes the relationship strong through sharing the love that already exists through the sex. But again the sex in itself doesn't cause, make, or anything specific with the love in itself. you just made a connection. POTENTIALLY. Does not mean it does. There are plenty other ways to share your love that is safer and more efficient. It's not the sex in itself, it's the feeling of being "special", set out from the other guys/girls, treated differently. Again can be accomplished through other actions because again it isn't the sex in itself that causes the love. So no, there isn't a connection lol. i do know what potentially means, thank you. it also means that it 'can', so you cannot have it both ways. people use it to get it. whether or not it does is inconsequential, it is something that people connect together. so yes, there is most definitely is a connection. if sex, as you suggest, is a way to share your love with someone, than you have made yet another connection. but i won't point that out, that way you don't have to explain to me how using these other methods you elude to are connected with love, but the act of making love isn't. Well thanks for defending having sex so strongly. But my original point was you don't HAVE to have the sex to have the love. And just because the sex is there, does not mean the love is. That is what I ment by there is no connection between the two, as in it is not a have to for either or. You have one without the other. People will use the word "love" to get sex. Which again is entirely false pretense, for again you don't have to have sex to have love nor does the sex thereof create the love. It "can" intensify the feeling of love or the connection thereof. But does not have to be to have that connection, can be found other ways that are even a stronger connection then the sex. But again, thanks for defending the sex so enthusiastically. well thanks for not being a condescending jerk..... at no point have i defended having sex. what i am defending is that fact that the two are connected. just because they don't necessarily rely on each other, a point of yours in which i do agree, does in no way, shape or form make them mutually exclusive. ohhh again, thanks for not being a condescending jerk. Wow, I do apologize if I offended you or hurt you in any way. Did not mean to come across as such. Again i apologize. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I mean yeah it's a great way to share that love with your partner. But for the love in itself it has no connection to the sex. The sex won't make you fall in love, nor make the other fall in love. Nor make the love stronger. It potentially makes the relationship strong through sharing the love that already exists through the sex. But again the sex in itself doesn't cause, make, or anything specific with the love in itself. you just made a connection. POTENTIALLY. Does not mean it does. There are plenty other ways to share your love that is safer and more efficient. It's not the sex in itself, it's the feeling of being "special", set out from the other guys/girls, treated differently. Again can be accomplished through other actions because again it isn't the sex in itself that causes the love. So no, there isn't a connection lol. i do know what potentially means, thank you. it also means that it 'can', so you cannot have it both ways. people use it to get it. whether or not it does is inconsequential, it is something that people connect together. so yes, there is most definitely is a connection. if sex, as you suggest, is a way to share your love with someone, than you have made yet another connection. but i won't point that out, that way you don't have to explain to me how using these other methods you elude to are connected with love, but the act of making love isn't. Well thanks for defending having sex so strongly. But my original point was you don't HAVE to have the sex to have the love. And just because the sex is there, does not mean the love is. That is what I ment by there is no connection between the two, as in it is not a have to for either or. You have one without the other. People will use the word "love" to get sex. Which again is entirely false pretense, for again you don't have to have sex to have love nor does the sex thereof create the love. It "can" intensify the feeling of love or the connection thereof. But does not have to be to have that connection, can be found other ways that are even a stronger connection then the sex. But again, thanks for defending the sex so enthusiastically. well thanks for not being a condescending jerk..... at no point have i defended having sex. what i am defending is that fact that the two are connected. just because they don't necessarily rely on each other, a point of yours in which i do agree, does in no way, shape or form make them mutually exclusive. ohhh again, thanks for not being a condescending jerk. Wow, I do apologize if I offended you or hurt you in any way. Did not mean to come across as such. Again i apologize. Even though my comments were in response to this and in that same context as well, not just a general sex/love, ect. Nor were they pointed at you nor any specific body else. For some it's a need to be loved and love equals sex. Was just pointing out, love does not equal sex. Just because two are in love, does not mean they are going to or have to have sex. And just because people have sex does not mean there is any kind of emotional connection especially to the extent of love. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hmm I've wondered about this a lot. I do believe feelings of abandonment and rejection contribute to promiscuity. Yes it can just be because a person enjoys having sex, but in the back of one's mind, he/she probably remembers feeling abandoned by a parent, or someone they dated at some point. These feelings just trigger being open sexually, and as someone else pointed out, it just gives the person a feeling of empowerment, and a sense that they are able to control this area of their life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Laughing ... Sometimes I also wonder .. If the need to analyse others in this way Is grounded in feelings of resentment .. Jealousy , bitterness or ignorance  Hey(((Blondey)))...Naw, not for me anyhooo ...I found Mariah's question and some of the responses interesting food for thought, but it had nothing to do with applying labels, jealousy, bitterness, and, god forbid, ignorance!...I agree with Beach, I REALLY LIKE TO #@%$ !!!
Good Lord!! I'm supposed to sleep after reading THAT. Not likely!!  
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amen blondey you rock
|
|
|
|
|
