"Medical grade lube" omg dying
But really though, we need a fun name for part 2
SEX!
- TiffanyMaxwell
- True Gossiper
- Posts: 1060
- Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2012 4:22 am
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
- Contact:
Re: SEX!
At certain times, I wish I was like that as well. I don't know how many females experience this because it's said to be a male trait but sometimes all I can think about is sex... It makes it hard to concentrate on anything else which is really bad at work or during study and feels disgusting between the legs because I lubricate without even touching myself or getting touched by anyone, which ends up in me putting tissues in my panties ... Awkward.lyts wrote:I am asexual, don't have any desire to ever have sex, it looks and sounds gross to me
-
- Talker
- Posts: 147
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 5:42 am
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
- Contact:
Re: SEX!
A few thread name suggestions:
sexytimezzzzzzz (because then it's still searchable)
sexual intercourse
rumpy pumpy
coitus
fornication station
No SCREWIN' around
Favs are in bold
sexytimezzzzzzz (because then it's still searchable)
sexual intercourse
rumpy pumpy
coitus
fornication station
No SCREWIN' around
Favs are in bold
- rollietrollypollie
- Extreme Gossiper
- Posts: 1859
- Joined: Wed Apr 17, 2013 12:58 am
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 1 time
- Contact:
Re: SEX!
Coitus = Sheldon Cooper
I vote for coitus lol
I vote for coitus lol
This is the deep and dying breath of, this love that we've been working on.
-
- Talker
- Posts: 147
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 5:42 am
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
- Contact:
Re: SEX!
That's exactly what I was thinking when I put it downrollietrollypollie wrote:Coitus = Sheldon Cooper
I vote for coitus lol
- Curiosity
- Informer
- Posts: 280
- Joined: Mon Aug 12, 2013 6:23 pm
- Has thanked: 33 times
- Been thanked: 4 times
- Contact:
Re: SEX!
I saw a some posts talking about it, so for those that have some questions regarding asexuality, you should browse through this site and the wiki connected to it. Click/hover on 'about asexuality' and look through the overview and different faq sections. It should answer any questions you have.
http://www.asexuality.org/home/
http://www.asexuality.org/wiki/index.ph ... =Main_Page
http://www.asexuality.org/home/
http://www.asexuality.org/wiki/index.ph ... =Main_Page
(` ーωー´)
- HattieChaos
- Naughty
- Posts: 1821
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 10:53 pm
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: SEX!
http://www.newstatesman.com/lifestyle/2 ... olyamorous
This is the best thing I have ever read. This is the cherry on top of my research on the way to deciding if I'm polyamorous or not. Recommended reading for anyone interested in polyamory or just general sexuality.
lo_lo: I'm pretty sure it's possible to orgasm from the nerves that surround the anus as they are very sensitive, but I have heard that orgasming from anal penetration (for "female-bodied" people) usually isn't viable and that it's the stimulation around that area that causes the orgasm. For men it's more enjoyable because they have the prostate. I'm pretty sure I heard that on Sexplanations but I may have muddled that up a bit so if anyone knows different please correct me!
This is the best thing I have ever read. This is the cherry on top of my research on the way to deciding if I'm polyamorous or not. Recommended reading for anyone interested in polyamory or just general sexuality.
lo_lo: I'm pretty sure it's possible to orgasm from the nerves that surround the anus as they are very sensitive, but I have heard that orgasming from anal penetration (for "female-bodied" people) usually isn't viable and that it's the stimulation around that area that causes the orgasm. For men it's more enjoyable because they have the prostate. I'm pretty sure I heard that on Sexplanations but I may have muddled that up a bit so if anyone knows different please correct me!
- HattieChaos
- Naughty
- Posts: 1821
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 10:53 pm
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: SEX!
Yeah that bit did piss me off as well, I don't like those kinds of sweeping statements as human sexuality is too complicated to say "we're all a little bit ____". I just liked the way she described her own feelings, I resonated a lot. I'd rather the headline was something like "Isn't it time we started to take polyamory seriously?" rather than implying it's something everyone's into.
Regarding your thoughts on the intimacy/loving-multiples thing, I did share the same opinion as you up until recently -I just couldn't comprehend falling in love with somebody else, I always viewed it as meaning that your love for the first person was watered down. That's until I experienced it myself. "True love" is subjective and I think something is meaningful if you want it to be. For me, I'd be fine knowing my partner has had sex with other people the nights before (providing they were safe ofc!) because I separate that from being unfaithful. I am still deciding where my line is, I'm almost certain I'm okay with multiple sex partners on both sides but I don't know about anything else, i.e: the "traditional" polyamory where they have multiple romantic partners. I think there'd be a problem if it became apparent there were preferences, that my partner preferred someone else to me rather than treating us "equally", which is why my line might end at sex. I am a jealous person, but I wouldn't get jealous in regards to sex. I know that for most people, sex is very much the signifier of a committed relationship but it's not for me, for me sex is pretty far down and I see it just as something to enjoy with another person regardless of if love is involved or not.
Again, that's totally just how I see things and nobody is wrong if they perceive sex as something that they can only do with one other significant person. As you said, the article's downfall is in it's silly assumption that everyone is like that. I do think monogamy is very unfair a lot of the time (the statistics that were given about partners feeling it's cheating if you stay up all night talking to somebody else horrified me... Under that definition, I am the cheatiest cheater alive!), and I do think that other options should be talked about and destigmatised, but that's not to say that polyamory is the only way forward. My dream scenario would be that we don't have one way of doing things but that we have a society that is open to all these different romantic setups, without pressuring anyone to go down one particular route as the "right" one.
Regarding your thoughts on the intimacy/loving-multiples thing, I did share the same opinion as you up until recently -I just couldn't comprehend falling in love with somebody else, I always viewed it as meaning that your love for the first person was watered down. That's until I experienced it myself. "True love" is subjective and I think something is meaningful if you want it to be. For me, I'd be fine knowing my partner has had sex with other people the nights before (providing they were safe ofc!) because I separate that from being unfaithful. I am still deciding where my line is, I'm almost certain I'm okay with multiple sex partners on both sides but I don't know about anything else, i.e: the "traditional" polyamory where they have multiple romantic partners. I think there'd be a problem if it became apparent there were preferences, that my partner preferred someone else to me rather than treating us "equally", which is why my line might end at sex. I am a jealous person, but I wouldn't get jealous in regards to sex. I know that for most people, sex is very much the signifier of a committed relationship but it's not for me, for me sex is pretty far down and I see it just as something to enjoy with another person regardless of if love is involved or not.
Again, that's totally just how I see things and nobody is wrong if they perceive sex as something that they can only do with one other significant person. As you said, the article's downfall is in it's silly assumption that everyone is like that. I do think monogamy is very unfair a lot of the time (the statistics that were given about partners feeling it's cheating if you stay up all night talking to somebody else horrified me... Under that definition, I am the cheatiest cheater alive!), and I do think that other options should be talked about and destigmatised, but that's not to say that polyamory is the only way forward. My dream scenario would be that we don't have one way of doing things but that we have a society that is open to all these different romantic setups, without pressuring anyone to go down one particular route as the "right" one.
Re: SEX!
I didn't even read the article because of that. What a load of bullshit. Even though I can't really understand it, I don't have a problem with people who are polyamorous. But polyamory is something I personally would never consider for myself. It's just so off-putting to me. If my partner would suggest a polyamorous relationship I'd probably get up and leave. My very own definition of a relationship is monogamous, and that's not negotiable.lo_lo wrote: I read this and it turned me off so much the statement "Isn’t it time we admitted we’re all a bit polyamorous?" no lol its not. some people enjoy monogamy and want a monogamous relationship.
I'd rather drink a cup of acid after chewing on a razor blade.
- HattieChaos
- Naughty
- Posts: 1821
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 10:53 pm
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: SEX!
Sometimes articles have sensationalist headlines, that doesn't immediately invalidate the good reasoning and statistics used within them.
- HattieChaos
- Naughty
- Posts: 1821
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2015 10:53 pm
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: SEX!
I get that, I shared it because I thought we could look past a sensationalist headline and appreciate an article for it's good reasoning and interesting statistics.
- RMORMO-SleepsNoMore
- Gossiper
- Posts: 501
- Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2014 12:58 pm
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: SEX!
pinkbows wrote:LOL OMG.rollietrollypollie wrote:If you think you don't need to do kegels look up uterus prolapse.
You're welcome for the nightmares ladies!
Rosebud porn is wayyy worse though.
EW EW EW EW EW EW EW I KNOW WHAT UR TALKING ABOUT FLASHBACKS OF A VIDEO I WATCHED
.....loving you is really hard....
Re: SEX!
Fornication station... Now that's clever.ravioliiii wrote:A few thread name suggestions:
sexytimezzzzzzz (because then it's still searchable)
sexual intercourse
rumpy pumpy
coitus
fornication station
No SCREWIN' around
Favs are in bold
Re: SEX!
Okay may have jumped the gun a wee bit but I couldn't wait
Congratulations on being depraved enough to have TWO sex threads, ladies!! (kidding )
Continue here: http://gurugossiper.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=12705
Congratulations on being depraved enough to have TWO sex threads, ladies!! (kidding )
Continue here: http://gurugossiper.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=12705