Skip to main content

Straight talk about sexual relationships

Just because a guy wants to fuck you doesn't necessarily mean he likes you. If he says he loves you, it doesn't necessarily mean he likes you. If he marries you, it doesn't necessarily mean he likes you. If you are confused about how he feels about you, if the slightest doubt exists in your mind about whether or not he likes you ~ he doesn't like you. Older guys that come onto younger girls are too immature to attract mature (sorted) women. Or they are paedophiles. Guys who want to fuck models are into pre-pubesent boys (consider the similarity in body shape). Nobody tells young guys about the clit, you must. The only way to make sure you have the pick of good relationships is to make sure that you are funny, intelligent and warm ~ if someone wants something other than that they haven't worked out what is important yet, dump 'em. Men won't wear condoms unless you force them, can you? You have just as much right to express your sexuality AS YOU WANT TO as everybody else.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

On 'natural'

I don't think 'natural' is good. There are many things that we apply (some almost arbitrary) (some ignorant and backward ideas of natural and not-natural agenda-propagating) rules of morality. I think 'natural' is a political rhetoric, profoundly abused.  'Diversity' is the only defensible rhetoric for 'thinking' beings. We are not, of course, the only creatures that do thinking, but we are the only creatures with the power to oppress others and other creatures whose languages we don't understand.  Us (badly) thinking creatures, slowly, ponderously gathering the evidence of our badness (I see no reason for your (god's) patience with us), have the ability to decide to be better than (the fashionable) 'natural' of the day.  It is our responsibility to transcend our vileness. Just that. That one task. Our thinkingness I believe is for that. A world (constructed by god) to demonstrate this point. And we will find every rhetor...

Richard Dawkins on militant atheism

Dawkins has become outspoken in his atheism , coining the word "bright" (as an alternate to atheist), and encouraging fellow non-believers to stand up and be identified. intelligent design is creationism redressed creationists are right that evolution is hostile to evolution statistical improbability of the complexity of design - intelligent design but the intelligent designer wouldn't have made such a hash - why would the designer be bothered with disapproving of our sex lives, favor our side in the war Dawkins suggest rocking the boat - attack religion as a whole taboo of speaking ill about religion - Douglas Adams said, sacred ideas at the heart of religion, holy cows, you can support any operating system you want, but the challenge of religious ideas is off limits science and religion are corrosive to each other - religious explanations are trivial and improbably, teaches people to accept authoritarianism takes the example of famous scientists and imagines ...

Mary Daly explains the pejoration (of one) of the words related to women

Of Death and Conscience: Brief thoughts on gender role and the values of the dominant culture in medicine : "“Under the influence of the Church and the newly formed male-dominated medical establishment, the word “witch,” which originally meant “wise one,” became a term of scorn. It took a reign of terror lasting several hundred years to radically alter a way of life thousands of years old. Millions of women who carried the healing lineage were systematically killed (see The Church and the Second Sex by Mary Daly).”"