Home› Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options

Raunch: Is it liberating or destroying women?

13»

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sophia wrote:
    What is your opinion of the bloke who is getting his cock sucked, out of interest?

    Gutter trash :dunno:

    Theres not really an equivalent male word for slag...but that would be it...

    I understand youre trying to paint me as a hypocrit but believe me, im equally disgusted by men and women these days..

    Perhaps im just old fashioned...I never bought into the whole get your tits out thing...liberation? hardly.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    \
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sophia wrote:
    I'm not trying to paint YOU as a hypocrite, it's more that we're a society of hypocrites when it comes to stuff like that, as evidenced by the fact we have no word for the male equivalent of a slag, and yet loads to describe women.

    However I agree that getting your tits out isn't liberation, it's just the same old objectification only this time we're doing it to ourselves, joining in the objectification of women because we think it's what men want us to do.

    Maybe im using the wrong words here...I dont have a problem with a girl sleeping with lots of guys....Just being lewd and graphic in public..No self respect etc...

    Its none of my business what a girl does in her private life, but when you see it all spill out onto the streets, thats when i have a problem..

    Totally agree with the second part of your post.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sophia wrote:
    I'm not trying to paint YOU as a hypocrite, it's more that we're a society of hypocrites when it comes to stuff like that, as evidenced by the fact we have no word for the male equivalent of a slag, and yet loads to describe women.

    That's because the closest terms for men - stud, player, etc - are taken as compliments, not insults. That's just part of natural gender difference.
  • Options
    SkiveSkive Posts: 15,284 Skive's The Limit
    Balddog wrote:
    Telling me to fuck off simply because you misread my first post.

    It was the comments after it'd been established that I'd misread you original post that pissed me off.

    Balddog wrote:
    Where did I say its because of their clothes and drinking?.

    ...
    Balddog wrote:
    Im not gonna apologise for finding half naked women throwing up over themselves distasteful...Or for walking home at night and not enjoying the sight of girls pissed out of their heads
    Weekender Offender 
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Skive wrote:
    It was the comments after it'd been established that I'd misread you original post that pissed me off.
    ...

    Yeah and you being constantly abusive toward me is supposed to make me happy right? You aint the only one who gets pissed off mate.

    and the quoted posts...its the behavior thats the problem...drinking to excess and acting like animals....
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    \
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sophia wrote:
    What? How is it a "part of natural gender difference" that we applaud sexually active men, and castigate sexually active women?

    There's nothing natural about that all, it's a social creation. The moral judgments we make about people's behaviour can't be a natural response, it's a learned one.

    It's natural for men to take terms like that as compliments - in an evolutionary sense, it's not hard to understand why.

    Not so with women, although don't make out women are castigated for being sexually active by society as a rule - that's totally untrue. Most people who look down on sexually active women are guys who aren't getting any or, more commonly, other women.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    sophia wrote:
    What? How is it a "part of natural gender difference" that we applaud sexually active men, and castigate sexually active women?

    Because its alpha male behaviour to fuck as many women as possible, stoopid.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The idea of women having to be "pure" while men can spread their seed far a wide is an idea forced into society by Religions in the past two thousand years. The blame of the woman for corrupting the riteousness of the man and all that other crap that is nonesense.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    subject13 wrote:
    The idea of women having to be "pure" while men can spread their seed far a wide is an idea forced into society by Religions in the past two thousand years.

    :confused:

    Men are supposed to keep their cock in their pants too, you know.

    And the huge thing about masturbation being a sin wasn't aimed at young girls flicking beans.

    I'll grant you the corrupting woman thing, though, the Bible is full of it- Delilah is evil, after all, it has nothing to do with Samson.
Sign In or Register to comment.