Women should remain pure but men should fu*k anything that walks.

[Lost In Translation]

^^^ great post TillTheEndOfTime

you point out the physical evidence that men and women are different

i pointed out the mind/mental/emotional difference


Lost In Translation

**AUSTRALIAN STREET PIMP**

 

[Black_Italian]

Originally posted by Lost In Translation
sexual liberty aside for a moment

lets look at the effects

are the effects of having many partners the same for a man and women ?

NO

a woman who is emotional is penetrated by a man

not just physically but emotionally

what happens to women who does this alot with many different partners ?

THEY GET MESSED UP EMOTIONALLY

they turn into head cases


now we can wave signs for womens rights all day long

yes people have rights and if they wanna sleep with 100 men thats their business

but just like many issues feminism never addresses the CONSEQUENCES

what happens if women get jobs and all women work

WHO RAISES THE CHILDREN

there are so many more questions while we parade for womens rights

WHAT PISSES ME OFF is no one who says WOMEN POWER ever speaks of the CONSEQUENCES


now back to the topic

Don Juans what are the consequences to a woman if she goes against her nature and sleeps with many men of no real meaning ?

what happens to her mind ? her emotions ?

don't GUESS

KNOW


Lost In Translation

**AUSTRALIAN STREET PIMP**

Who are you to say it is against a woman’s nature to sleep with men and have not emotional attachment. Why do women have **** buddies then? It is because they want sex with no emotional attachment. Like I said it is social conditioning that makes you believe this bull****. Women can have sex without any emotional attachment IT IS IN THERE NATURE.

Do you have any definitive proof that it is not in a women nature to have sex with no emotional attachment?

If you do I will be happy to hear it. But you don’t because it doesn’t exist. The only reason you think like that is because you were brought up like that to believe that ****. Well you were lied to so was everybody else. What you were brought up to believe in no way applies to the real world.

If it is against a women nature to have sex purely for pleasure why does she have a ****oris?

The other thing you said is women’s rights and feminism. You are taking my post completely out of context I am not supporting women’s rights here. I am simply saying its time for men to realize that they have been lied to all there lives and that girls want sex as much as us and it’s not a bad thing if they do have sex.

EDIT: and to your last post lostintranslation you do point out those differences but you cannot back them up by fact. So they are nothing but speculation and assumptions.

Ninja out

 

[Black_Italian]

Re: Re: Women should remain pure but men should fu*k anything that walks.

This is in reply to TillTheEndOfTims's post

Your theory is apt but flawed. If you read Sperm Wars you will gain some of insight on this subject. Il give you a short overview. Out of the billions of sperm created by a man only a small percentage have the ability to actually fertilize an egg lets call these the “swimmers”. The rest of the sperm are in essence “warrior” types. Stick with me here I know this sounds ridiculous. If sperm of two men is mixed the "warrior sperm" will do its job of attacking and killing the other mans sperm. The man with the strongest sperm wins the prize of fertilizing the egg. So each mans sperm is designed to fight an others sperm.

So what does this tell us?

Survival of the fittest perhaps?

If a women has sex with many men the sperm will fight it out insider her and the winning sperm will have the chance to fertilize the egg. Therefore the ‘fittest” sperm will win creating the “fittest” offspring.

So if you look at it this way why would nature create warrior sperm if a female should only have an exclusive partner?

Ninja out

 

[Lost In Translation]

YOUNG MAN

Who are you to say it is against a woman’s nature to sleep with men and have not emotional attachment.

one of us is right

even the DJ Bible says women and men are different

WE ARE DIFFERENT !!!


the mind of a woman is different to the mind of a man


the body of a woman is different to the body of a man


NOT SAME


so the consequences for a man and woman having sex ?

PHYSICAL ? same ?

HELL NO

A WOMAN FALLS PREGNANT

a human being grows inside her body


if at every point men and women are different

and the consequences are diffferent

and this can be proved

WHY NOT QUESTION THE FEMINIST PROPAGANDA YOU PREACH

girls want sex as much as us and it’s not a bad thing if they do have sex

i AGREE WITH YOU HERE

but you are still not addressing the emotional and mental aspects fo sex and how these differ for a woman


has this site not taught you that a woman is different from a man ?

LOGIC DOES NOT WORK

an emotional connection and all the other things spoken of in the dj bible explain the difference


Lost In Translation

**AUSTRALIAN STREET PIMP**

 

[MacDiddy]

BI: is this your attempt to put a more academic slash intellectual face on your seduction logic?.. Coz it's a HUGE departure from all your other offerings...

Did you suddenly have a brain-fart or something?..

 

[Black_Italian]

To Lost in Translation

I am not debating the emotional differences. I know women are different to men. Women tend to concentrate on different things when choosing a partner ect ect.

My question to you is:

Were is your proof that it is against a women nature to have more than one sexual partner?

I have provided evidence to backup my claims both emotinal and physical you have provided nothing.

AND

Originally posted by MacDiddy
BI: is this your attempt to put a more academic slash intellectual face on your seduction logic?.. Coz it's a HUGE departure from all your other offerings...

Did you suddenly have a brain-fart or something?..

I have never touched on this subject in the past. So i do not know what your talking about.

Ninja out

 

[Lost In Translation]

Black_Italian
I have provided evidence to backup my claims both emotinal and physical you have provided nothing.

please quote and post where you proved or even mentioned before i put your thesis to the acid test where you said such things ?


Lost In Translation

**AUSTRALIAN STREET PIMP**

 

[TillTheEndOfTime]

Re: Re: Re: Women should remain pure but men should fu*k anything that walks.

Originally posted by Black_Italian
This is in reply to TillTheEndOfTims's post

Your theory is apt but flawed. If you read Sperm Wars you will gain some of insight on this subject. Il give you a short overview. Out of the billions of sperm created by a man only a small percentage have the ability to actually fertilize an egg lets call these the “swimmers”. The rest of the sperm are in essence “warrior” types. Stick with me here I know this sounds ridiculous. If sperm of two men is mixed the "warrior sperm" will do its job of attacking and killing the other mans sperm. The man with the strongest sperm wins the prize of fertilizing the egg. So each mans sperm is designed to fight an others sperm.

So what does this tell us?

Survival of the fittest perhaps?

If a women has sex with many men the sperm will fight it out insider her and the winning sperm will have the chance to fertilize the egg. Therefore the ‘fittest” sperm will win creating the “fittest” offspring.

So if you look at it this way why would nature create warrior sperm if a female should only have an exclusive partner?

Ninja out

I know this theory. It does not only apply to the sperm of different men only. It applies to ALL sperm. Your own sperm can kill each other too. This helps ensure that your best sperm will fertilize the egg. In the event that for some reason there is more than one man's sperm in her uterus, then yes they all "fight". Again, this does not mean this only happens with sperm from different men. Remember, not all your sperm are built equal. Some are better than others and nature helps ensure that the most healthy sperm fertilize the egg since they are more likely to produce a health child.

Also, a women's vagina attacks sperm too. Again, this acts as a way to kill off the weak sperm that are not worthy of fertilizing an egg.

The "sperm fighting = women are meant to have sex with many men" argument does not hold together very well in view of the above.


Besides, this is still ignoring the fact that women produce very few eggs to fertilize and once pregnant, naturally desist from wanting sexual intercourse.

This happens to men too after intercourse....but only for a few days while their sperm regenerates. Then they're ready to go back at it. Women get pregnant for several months and generally don't have sex in that period. At least this is the natural feeling (not everything done in modern society follows the natural feeling 100%).

 

[MetalFortress]

Originally posted by Black_Italian
To Lost in Translation

I am not debating the emotional differences. I know women are different to men. Women tend to concentrate on different things when choosing a partner ect ect.

My question to you is:

Were is your proof that it is against a women nature to have more than one sexual partner?

I have provided evidence to backup my claims both emotinal and physical you have provided nothing.

AND



I have never touched on this subject in the past. So i do not know what your talking about.

Ninja out

Erm, actually, it looks to me like he provided emotional consequences as a fact against your point. You can't just haphazardly ignore anything that doesn't support your point.

 

[Black_Italian]

Originally posted by MetalFortress
Erm, actually, it looks to me like he provided emotional consequences as a fact against your point. You can't just haphazardly ignore anything that doesn't support your point.

No all he actually said was women are different women are emotionally different women have babies. I hardly consider what he said “emotional consequences as a fact”. He has not provided me with proof that if a woman is not monogamous it is going against her nature. So to clarify he said it is going against her nature and he has shown no proof to backup his theory therefore his point is invalid.

Originally posted by TillTheEndOfTime
I know this theory. It does not only apply to the sperm of different men only. It applies to ALL sperm. Your own sperm can kill each other too. This helps ensure that your best sperm will fertilize the egg. In the event that for some reason there is more than one man's sperm in her uterus, then yes they all "fight". Again, this does not mean this only happens with sperm from different men. Remember, not all your sperm are built equal. Some are better than others and nature helps ensure that the most healthy sperm fertilize the egg since they are more likely to produce a health child.

Also, a women's vagina attacks sperm too. Again, this acts as a way to kill off the weak sperm that are not worthy of fertilizing an egg.

The "sperm fighting = women are meant to have sex with many men" argument does not hold together very well in view of the above.


Besides, this is still ignoring the fact that women produce very few eggs to fertilize and once pregnant, naturally desist from wanting sexual intercourse.

This happens to men too after intercourse....but only for a few days while their sperm regenerates. Then they're ready to go back at it. Women get pregnant for several months and generally don't have sex in that period. At least this is the natural feeling (not everything done in modern society follows the natural feeling 100%).

This theory never states that a man’s sperm fights its self. I do now know what theory you have. Maybe in the testes the sperm will fight its self to select the best like an army selecting its best soldier to go “attacking” sperm to select the best is also flawed. The only reason the women’s vagina kills sperm is because of the environment some of the liquids found in there can be hazardous to sperm. That’s the “warrior” sperms second job it has been shown that the man’s warrior sperm actually surround the “swimmers” to protect them from these hazardous liquids.

Whilst inside the vagina a man’s sperm does not fight its self it only fight other mens sperm. So the question remains why is sperm trained to fight other sperm if women are meant to be monogamous?

The other point that is being ignored is that women (self admittedly) love sex and these days the majority of them have had a few sexual partners by the time there 20. So nature is telling us that sperm is meant to fight inside a women and women are saying they love sex WHY are there still people that believe it is wrong and unnatural for a women to have sex with more than one guy?

Avon YOUR THE MAN lol

Ninja out

 

[Big Eee Zee]

So to clarify he said it is going against her nature and he has shown no proof to backup his theory therefore his point is invalid.

?!?


So he provided no proof and therefore his point is invalid?
Lemme clue you in on a little secret.

YOU HAVE NO PROOF EITHER!

You are invalid, sir.


Black_italian, you have thouroughly had your sh!t handed to you. Game, blouses...

besides, does anyone else like pursuing a girl where you know as soon as you break up with her she's gonna go hook up with three different guys in the next week? I don't...A few partners is fine, 15 is not.

 

[Black_Italian]

I actually backed up my point with fact and you obviously do not understand what I am saying. I am not telling people to go date wh*res that fu*k every single guy they see. I started the thread because on four occasions four different people said that only girls acceptable for LTRs are virgins. Then I continued to back my point when Lost in translations said that it goes against a woman’s nature to have sex with more than one guy.

So make sure you properly read before you start blindly accusing people of being "invalid"

Idiot.

Ninja out

 

[frivolousz21]

sex for women is probaby 90 percent emotionally and mental.

believe it.

alot of women sleep around for the emotional "instant gratification"

its called the feeling of love..or being loved.


even some men do that.


from my expierence....I have had sex with 3 women who are in love with me.

all 3 benifited from the sex on an emotional and mental level far more than physical..infacft there feelings for me..madethem have the best of there lives...they were in exstacy because of the feelings.



women have sex for babies and emotional gratification..if they are fycking multiple guys to just fyck...then you might want to pass on them...much more likely to cheat on you.

 

[mrRuckus]

Originally posted by Black_Italian
I actually backed up my point with fact

It may be fact to you but not to the rest of us since you basically just say it without actual evidence (links and such to reputable sources). For all everyone knows you just make things up as you go along. Three of you go back and forth with different versions of science and both believe you have the "facts." Now pony up the scientific write ups instead of going "yes suh!" and "nuh uh!!"

Not that I even disagree with you (or even agree really); i've seen this warrior sperm thing before. I simply took it as fact ever since i first saw it on some sex special on the discovery channel a few years ago... i didn't realize they weren't 100% sure as TillTheEndOfTime has started to suggest. I'll be reading up on it myself out of curiosity.

 

[Black_Italian]

They are sure its fact i said its from a book called Sperm Wars by Robin Baker. This theory has been proven therfore i gave proof and lost in translation never did.

Ninja out

 

[mrRuckus]

Originally posted by Black_Italian


This theory never states that a man’s sperm fights its self.

About your own book reference:

"Baker also discusses the discovery of specialized sperm that may kill a man's own egg-getters under certain prescribed circumstances"

 

[Q-Pid]

And you wonder why so many women are c0ckteases.

 

[Black_Italian]

I haven’t read this book in a while. What circumstances? I don’t believe it is under any normal circumstances otherwise I would remember. Im pretty sure that point doesn’t apply to what we are talking about.

Ninja out

 

[bud1971]

What L.I.T. said.....plus, one thing I never hear mentioned is that women control the flow of sex........therefore, the societal judgement falls upon them for the wisdom or folly of who and how many they allow to penetrate them. Feminism will also not likely change the fact that they must carry the baby. Maybe that is why feminist lesbians are the mainstays at "pro-choice" rallies.

In my book there is no double standard, because there already is a situation that is exactly the same as the "*****" label placed on women. Last time I checked, prostitution carried a huge stigma.....and we get ARRESTED for it! Now that I think about it we are getting screwed.....when we control the access to sex....we go to jail.........

Bottom line is that men are studs because they have to play the game well, and women are cheap because they got played and have nothing to show for it.

 

[Big Eee Zee]

They are sure its fact i said its from a book called Sperm Wars by Robin Baker.

Well, excuse me all to hell. If it was written in a book, then that automatically makes any arguement that alludes to it infallible and completly undisputable, right.

How silly of me...

I started the thread because on four occasions four different people said that only girls acceptable for LTRs are virgins.

So make sure you properly read before you start blindly accusing people of being "invalid"

Well, I didn't say that. I said that only the girls who really get around should be avoided, but girls who have had a few partners are fine. So perhaps you are the one who should properly read posts...ironic.