by DreamMaster 51 Replies latest social relationships
Ok, I wasnt going to reply to this sensitive thread.
But here goes. Harmony you lovely girl you, you are so very right in everything you have said.
I to was disgusted with the entrapment.
Whether you trust someone or not, they are likely to live up to your expectations. Either way, you are proven right.
Harmony, you go girl.
Safe, ditto, it was the first thing to jump out at me too.
DM, ever heard of 'unconditional love'
BugEye
If every time I felt horny, I f```ed someone, I would have about 689784785 children.
Chris, do your girlfriend, yourself, your future children, and the world at large a big favor. Type "birth control" into a search engine. Do this when you aren't busy and can take time to read and think about what you learn.
COMF
So what's the point Chris. How do YOU define instinct. Obviously you have a definition that is different from common useage. Your argument seems to be:
Since sex can be influenced by rational processes THEREFORE it isn't instinctive.
My point has been that cyber-sex is NOT a terrible breach of the marriage contract. It may be a violation of a persons preference that they receive ALL love and affection from their partner. My argument is that life,love,relationships,marriage have a basis in our being the kind of animals we are. These things arive late on the scene and are mostly noise in the machinery. Dreamaker is disappointed (not shocked I hope) because he is a tad bit idealistic.
On the issue of "Invasion of Privacy"......
That would seem a two-edge sword. I agree, privacy is necessary. But how do most people find out about their mates having lovers, other wives, other children? Do the offending mates just blurt it out to them? Perhaps sometimes.
But usually there are clues, clues lead to looking around from the mate not sharing sex/lives with others. How does the mate do this looking around? If they ask the mate, and the mate says no - then what? Just say ok and stick her/his head back in the sand? Isn't this akin to what the elders are being damned for in child molester cases? Asking the person "did you do this?" Molester - no. Elder, ok - we respect your privacy and your word. Don't want to pry into another person's life. End of story. After all, usually there is no hard proof.
I think some common sense is called for. I have no answer for DreamMaster except a real life experience. A friend of mine was engaged to a man who was romantically involved with a woman on the web. She knew he had been talking to her, but became suspicious when it was so frequent. Tthen the engaged woman confronted him. He absolutely denied everything. She then invaded his privacy - and found all the receipts for roses, then dinner, then jewelry. Again, she confronted - he acknowledged his web romance gone real time.
What was she supposed to do when he denied it? Say ok, let's still get married? Stick her head in the sand and say there's nothing there? That's the way women & men (particularily women) have done for centuries, and I don't feel it's for the good of a relationship.
Somewhere, there's a middle road - but putting instincts aside and head in the sand, butt in the air to be kicked is not middle road, imho.
waiting
ps - I put my head in the sand and did not invade my first husband's privacy for his first 4 girlfriends and continuous selling of drugs. Then I took my blinders off - and had witnesses against him for divorce within a week. Not only did I invade the bastard's privacy - I took him for every damned penny I could get for me & our 3 kids.
On my previous post, I was not saying that cyber sex was right or wrong. I did state that meeting a person outside the marriage and having sex for real would be wrong. Other than that, I simply raised a question, and the purpose of my post was to simply try to briefly explain WHY some people might choose to use engage in cyber sex.
Frankly, I don't consider cybersex to be sex. When invited to engage in it, my reply is, "I appreciate the offer, but I guess not. I prefer physical contact with my sex."
That doesn't change the fact, though, that DreamMaster and his wife have some serious communication issues to work through, and that they need the help of a counselor to do it.
COMF
Proplog2,
My argument is that life,love,relationships,marriage have a basis in our being the kind of animals we are.
And what a pathetic argument it is...
I am not an animal.
I am not even a Manimal.
But, I have known a few.
Spreading one's seed if you're a male is a structural arrangement. Nature doesn't grant you the luxury of thinking about it.
Okay, I'm going to d e f y Nature, and think about it:
Johnny Appleseed was a great imaginary character.
He was a seed-spreader, very productive and a Good Farmer.
Johnny Wad was a gross imaginary character.
He was a seed-spreader, very productive and a Bad Fucker.
.
(Proplog, I gots the feeling we ain't gonna 'get along' too well)
.
It doesn't really matter if it is "real" or not. Men are more stimulated visually and you look at nude women to get off.
What matters is how each of you feel about it. If you each are doing something that hurts the other, or that makes the other feel violated, then you need to talk honestly about it and resolve the problem together. Perhaps you can live with your wife's online fantasizing the same as she accepts your actions.
Look buddy, it IS the same thing as looking at porn! accept that.
Tallyman:
Getting along with people is simply a matter of tolerance.
Biologically you are an animal as that term is usually used. Now if you want to put some idiosycratic meaning to the word "animal" that's fine. Good luck on restructuring the field of anthropology.
