Issues with gf's past

[SelflessnHumble]

Well I have no clue how you know what experiences I have or lack, yet you state as such \/ there. Hey, I figure, since you pull vague loony talk out of your ass, I might as well, too.

Fair enough, please share your experiences in detail and what you have gone through, what you have learned
about yourself and the "why" you made those errors in your past, and HOW you overcame them?

I'll patiently wait for your vast knowledge to show up (which is devoid in ALL of your posts) btw.

If you were secure and did have experiences, you would not need to make assumptions of others (experience) and insult them.You are lost.

I make observations, because other people ASKED for my advice (being I'm a member of this forum)
An assumption is what YOU do because you haven't lived (evident by your own close mindedness) which stem
from the obvious: You cannot allow other people to disagree with you without your ass getting chapped, over
the internet, with strangers posting from all over the world. Insecure? Who? You, not me.

If I had the time, I would travel to your location and "show" you security. And you would show me insecurity.
If you'd like to paypal me a round trip ticket from my location I'd be happy to visit you. You just let me know, k?

I forgive you such harsh, angry words, for I recognize that they stem from your own latent ignorance and insecurity.

Do you know what words mean? I'm immensely educated, and I don't need to prove myself
(to a whimsical nonsense troll like yourself) in order to validate myself (the definition of security) of which you LACK!

You ask questions and demand answers, (when you are coming without knowing yourself the answers therein)
And then when someone doesn't answer you: your power and illusory abilities (being that they are so vast and limitless)
you are able to push people out of "entire threads" as if it were some accomplishment worthy of a person who has
intellect, fortitude, security, and confidence in their own self.

You cannot accept that you have such mental impurities and insecurities. You are in denial, which is in and of itself an impurity. Thus, you are a child, lost in a cave with a flashlight, proclaiming "I SEE the light, See, HERE IT IS upon the wall!" yet, you only lead yourself deeper into ignorance and lunacy.

I can accept I'm not perfect.
I can accept I am impure due to my imperfections.
I am able to be content with who and what I am, and not project these imperfections and use
them as projectiles (as you do) in order to hurt or mame other posters here who don't give a shit about
what YOU think about them when: (wait for it) THEY DIDN'T ASK YOU!!!!!

If your analogy is true...You and I are in the same cave, except my flashlight has fresh batteries and thus: illuminates.

If I am leading my self into deeper ignorance and lunacy, PLEASE, I humbly ask for you to
SHOW me the way to sanity, and empower me with your wise, limitless and empirical knowledge
based on what you've learned...I will patiently wait for you to answer my humble call. What good is all of this knowledge
you possess if you're unable/unwilling to share it?

[Incognito]

Can you empty your inbox PP? I have to leave in a few minutes and wanted to send you a PM.

[Incognito]

But you said rape doesn't count bro.

Dude, seriously. Do you even know what you're talking about? First you say "crack whore", "naive girl", but then you say circumstances don't count. Then you say rape doesn't count, but prostitutes do? Now you're saying rape counts again? lol Dude? Hello?

So every time a woman has too much to drink and makes a bad decision it is rape? I'm not talking about drugging someone or someone who is passed out. You've still haven't addressed how 30 vs 30 = stud vs slut.

[Petit Papillon]

My inbox is empty now...I just opened my mailbox and saw like 20 freakinf msgs from LF saying my inbox is full lol .

[Emerald_Dreams]

So every time a woman has too much to drink and makes a bad decision it is rape? I'm not talking about drugging someone or someone who is passed out.

Alcohol is a drug, and being drunk is a state of intoxication.

Do you know what the courts call it when you get a chick drunk and have sex with her?

Date rape.

[Incognito]

It depends on the level of intoxication. I see you still haven't answered my question and continue to beat around the bush ED.

[Incognito]

My inbox is empty now...I just opened my mailbox and saw like 20 freakinf msgs from LF saying my inbox is full lol .

LOL, I hate when that happens.

[SelflessnHumble]

So every time a woman has too much to drink and makes a bad decision it is rape? I'm not talking about drugging someone or someone who is passed out. You've still haven't addressed how 30 vs 30 = stud vs slut.

And yet he side stepped it again!
Anyway, while the ethics involved (for me) would disallow me to have sex with an intoxicated girl, I arrive at a sort of Cognitive Dissonance:

People who drink and then have sex say "it just happened" and oops, they didn't mean to, but wake up naked on the floor with their clothes off; which sucks no bones about it BUT...
To me: A drunk is STILL held accountable for their actions and to me: a drunk who cheats is still a cheat who drank too much, not an uncontrollable urge brought on by: alcohol...It's a choice, not an excuse.

Then I would never have sex with an intoxicated woman because I feel it's sorta like cheating, not the infidelity cheating, I mean I like the unknowing and uncertainty of
a girl's attraction, and the feelings that correspond to getting to know someone you have strong feelings for but don't intimately know them (yet) I don't want
a catalyst of any kind to press the fast forward button especially if alcohol (or a drug) and lower inhibitions.

It's a pickle.

[Incognito]

I am not saying that I'd do it, I was making a point that sex is sex, and that you can't discount certain instances unless they are non consensual. I probably shouldn't have even mentioned the drunk scenario as all it did was allow ED to go off on another tangent without answering how he reasonable justifies the stud/slut double standard [barring the "work" leading up to the act].

Note: Having sex with a woman who cannot make sound judgement IS rape, and I don't condone it at all. However having a few drinks to loosen one's inhibitions does not the same as being 'hammered'. If anyone has sex simply because they made a bad judgement call because of drinking it is still consensual (unless the person is unable to make basic sound judgements). If you can carry a normal conversation and are fit to drive then any sex you have at that time is consensual.

[Emerald_Dreams]

It depends on the level of intoxication.

Every state has it's own blood alcohol level that it considers "drunk" or "intoxicated", so it doesn't depend so much on the level of intoxication as it does what state your in - and it soon may be a federal law. It's common knowledge that men give women alcohol to lower their inhibitions. Their judgment is altered by drug, therefore they cannot give consent. It is considered rape.

I see you still haven't answered my question and continue to beat around the bush ED.

I wasn't beating around the bush, actually. I was striking at the heart of your argument and destroying some of the assumptions you based you premise on, is all. You're saying "circumstances don't count" but, as I've shown, they do. Would you care to rephrase your question?

[Incognito]

Post 57 and 63. You must be a politician...

[Take2]

Jogging for an hour a day vs paying thousands upon thousands of dollars for an education? An hour on the Stepmaster vs 8 hours in class? Um, are you seriously saying those are both equal? And it disproves my argument that it's easier for women to get laid? LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!

If your assertion is that women have to do nothing to get laid but ask, ANYTHING women have to do disproves your assertion. Changing your assertion slightly to accomodate each round of discussion is ridiculous. The thousands and thousands of dollars are irrelevant, as you have agreed with me that uneducated servcemen can get laid easily. So yeah, an hour a day exercising and the cost of that Stepmaster are as much as putting on a uniform provided by the US government.

Nope, but if there's one thing they do have, it's MONAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY. A serviceman (usually Naval) has no rent, bills, etc to pay, and they make about 2,000 a month at E-1. I know Seamen who go to a bar and spend hundreds of dollars a night. I know doctors who never get out.

Yeah. LOL!!!!!

Can you prove or back that up in any way? Because I actually spent some time hanging with a group of Navy guys, and they were all broke all the time. Their expenses are low, but their pay is low, too. And since women seem to just fall into bed with them, a lot of them have big chunks of their pay spoken for in child support. Yet they still get laid without any effort at all. The servicemen hangouts are not the swanky expensive martini lounges, they are the places with the cheap buckets of beer. No effort, no money, and yet these guys sleep with a new woman every time they go out.

[Emerald_Dreams]

got some girl drunk and slept with her

However having a few drinks to loosen one's inhibitions does not the same as being 'hammered'.

Could you please distinct between "drunk", and "hammered"?

If you can carry a normal conversation and are fit to drive then any sex you have at that time is consensual.

So you're saying that if a woman has sex after 2 drinks, it's considered rape?

[Emerald_Dreams]

So yeah, an hour a day exercising and the cost of that Stepmaster are as much as putting on a uniform provided by the US government.

So wait, spending a few grand on a Stepmaster and exercising for an hour a day is the equivalent of 8 months in boot camp and losing your life in war? Okay. I'm done with you now.

[SelflessnHumble]

I am not saying that I'd do it, I was making a point that sex is sex, and that you can't discount certain instances unless they are non consensual. I probably shouldn't have even mentioned the drunk scenario as all it did was allow ED to go off on another tangent without answering how he reasonable justifies the stud/slut double standard [barring the "work" leading up to the act].

I can understand how someone can arrive at such a lopsided double standard that affords women to be branded
just because they ARE women? I mean it's sexist, it's ignorant and doesn't seem to make much sense (to me) and I'm open minded about this issue
-I used to think and feel I was superior to women and would treat them like the kitchen dwelling sandwich making, sperm depositories I thought they were designed to be.
-I used to think women were the reason we were on this planet: to suffer because of their biblical choices in Genesis...
-Then my 1st true love cheated, and lied to me I began to hate women, and used the living shit out of them: in the way I knew how: lies, manipulation designed at:
-Getting unlimited sex without ever committing, dumping them, getting with their cousin, their sister heck even one girl's mother! Out of control and totally irresponsible.

After all of my poor decisions I finally learned men need women, and they need us (usually) -Not discounting gays, just heterosexually speaking.
And that women are gifts, (not to be put on pedestals, of course) but to be respected, appreciated, loved and of course: equal to a man.

This also means they cannot use emotional irrationality as an excuse due to their PMS...Even though I understand how a woman could feel (but never ever felt their pains)
This is usually where give and take commence because physical pain can compromise a person's well being (myself included) being irritable and restless...

The fact of the matter is: A man is equal to a woman, but my fact (and your fact) can be someone's opinion: subject to change based on perception.
I would never beat nor rape a woman: to other people/cultures: it's cool and welcomed...In some: if you are married: you cannot use *rape* as an admissible offense in court!

I don't get Emerald's opinion, but I can respect it enough because it is HIS opinion...I don't agree with it.