Men on Top

[Alex Bragi]

Ladies, is it possible to imagine anything more erotically decadent and luxurious than being on the bottom? No, no, no! I'm no talking about being the bottom! I talking about being on the bottom—literally—laying back on that big old bed and letting him do all the hard yakka and sweating while you close your eyes and just enjoy it all. Yes, good old fashioned him on top of her sex!

In years gone, I guess it was considered rather unmanly for a man to allow a woman to be on top. Oh sure, I'm sure it went on, but I'm also sure it wasn't ever talked about, especially amongst the fairer sex. In fact I would wager it would have been thought of as rather kinky. Women, or more correctly—‘ladies', just weren't meant to get aroused sufficiently to want take a man sexually. It was considered unnatural for a woman to feel that way. In "The Merchant's Tale', Chaucer described an aroused woman as "mannish". And, in "Tom Jones", Henry Fiedling declared, "I dare to swear the wench was willing as he!"

So, is it 'mannish', or in appropriate, for a woman to take control during sex and place herself on top? Well, of course it damn well is!

Men are physically stronger than women, they're meant to be the active partner during sex. It's the way they're built—strong arms and legs for supporting themselves over their delicate and venerated women.

Women,on the other hand, have soft cushiony butts to rest back on during sex and bodies that are soft and smooth-- ideal for pumping up and down on.

I think it just dandy that men have discovered that women don't lose half their brain cells when they get married, that their perfectly capable of balancing a cheque book, and equally qualified to assess and have a say in how their country is run. It is, however, rather disappointing to me that women's liberation has spoilt certain aspects of sex. Once upon a time sex was no effort at all for a woman. It was all lay back and enjoy, "Take me. Take me! I'm yours!" Now, thanks to the likes of the Blue Stocking Brigade, he wants a piece of the action, or rather lack of it, too!

It's just not fair! I want to see women liberated from this kind of women's liberation!

Maybe life isn't always fair? Maybe it isn't all about getting what you want? If it was, I'd be laying naked on a topical island, an icey margarita in one hand and fan in the other, while Ben Affleck (also naked) laid on top of me panting, sweating, and working his cute little butt off as.... Ah, but I digress.

Well, I still want see men back on top, exactly where they belong, serving and pleasuring women everywhere!

But, seriously, do you believe women's movement has helped or hindered our sex lives? Are men sometimes perhaps intimidated by women with a sex drives as strong, or stronger than their own, or do most find it a big turn on? Does it perhaps depend on how secure the man is with his own sexuality?

I really don't want to get too personal here, but what do you think about it?

Footnote: Surveys show that men generally support "women's issues," more than women do! They (surveys) also show that women generally believe women's liberation has benefited men more then women. That is, women have assumed more responsibility for financially supporting the family than men have assumed for caring for the house and family. Hochschild (1989) interviewed 50 two-career couples and found that the women worked 15 hours more each week than their husbands did.

[John Carter]

Well, I don't know about other guys, but I find that a woman who just lies back and expects me do all the work to be rather unappealing. If you just lay there, be assured that I will not be back for a return engagement.

[flopstock]

I think a good portion of my enjoyment comes from enjoying him and his body. I don't look upon it as aggressive so much as I do adoring. And I've got to say, it's been my experience that there is not a more sexually satisfying male then one who has been appreciated and satisfied himself.

[Adora]

Surveys show that men generally support "women's issues," more than women do!
No, they don't.

They (surveys) also show that women generally believe women's liberation has benefited men more then women.
Which it has, because men haven't caught up the load, and are thus suffering sad crisis of masculinity which escalates suicide rates and conservative backlashes. This still doesn't mean said men support women's lib.

That is, women have assumed more responsibility for financially supporting the family than men have assumed for caring for the house and family.
This is not true. Women do as much housework as they did before, on top of working full or part-time jobs. Overall in both Australia and America, nothing has changed except pressures on women to join the workforce by an economic rationalist set of governments who do not then try and support these women in their endeavours to gain employment.

Hochschild (1989) interviewed 50 two-career couples and found that the women worked 15 hours more each week than their husbands did.
Maybe you missed English class, but one survey does not a plural make, especially when the data you quote does not support the claims you assert.

[Alex Bragi]

Maybe you missed English class, but one survey does not a plural make, especially when the data you quote does not support the claims you assert.

Actually, the Hochschild survey, that I was referring to, was only one.

And, Adora, if you're trying to get me all lathered up, your'e going to have to try a whole lot harder. Ice cool Danish blood run though my veins. It takes a whole lot more of an educated argument than what you've put forward to stir me.

[Adora]

Actually, the Hochschild survey, that I was referring to, was only one.
Then maybe you'd actually like to provide the rest of them, y'know?

Also, some evidence to back up your claims of evolutionary sex physiology would be nice. And that female passivity during sex and male activity overall in heterosexual intercourse leads to more female sexual pleasure. And that "women's liberation has spoiled sex".

Instead of just your bullshit.

[Alex Bragi]

Also, some evidence to back up your claims of evolutionary sex physiology would be nice. And that female passivity during sex and male activity overall in heterosexual intercourse leads to more female sexual pleasure...

It's pure jest, Adora. Of course female passivity and male acitivity doesn't lead to any more or less enjoyment. I was teasing... joking... have a bit of fun! Fun, Adora! You know that thing other people have when they laugh and/or feel happy. :)

[Crumb]

:yup: Fun is good. You should try it some time, Adora.

[flopstock]

Actually, the Hochschild survey, that I was referring to, was only one.
Then maybe you'd actually like to provide the rest of them, y'know?

Also, some evidence to back up your claims of evolutionary sex physiology would be nice. And that female passivity during sex and male activity overall in heterosexual intercourse leads to more female sexual pleasure. And that "women's liberation has spoiled sex".

Instead of just your bullshit.

Actually, I read her post as an expression of her opinions and thoughts , followed by a simple request for our thoughts on the subject. In fact, the entire body of the post presents itself, quite obviously, as just that.

The footnote refers to a 1989 survey...not a case study or clinical research, but a survey. And speaks of generalizations. I'll hazard a guess here that she added this as a point of interest. So, what?

But this thread appears to be looking for an exchange of opinions and thoughts on the subject of 'her' choice. Do you have one....a thought that is?

[Adora]

In fact, the entire body of the post presents itself, quite obviously, as just that.
Unfortunately, the words "I think", "I believe", and "My opinion is" are missing too much from certain statements she makes for me to believe this.

And speaks of generalizations. I'll hazard a guess here that she added this as a point of interest. So, what?
So I object to stupidity. I then exchanged my thoughts and opinions on her post. She got what she was fishing for, even if it wasn't in the form she expected.

Fun is good. You should try it some time, Adora.
I would have thought my past explanations about my interaction on this board would have given you insight to my activities here, Crumb. Obviously, you lost your glasses that day.

You know that thing other people have when they laugh and/or feel happy.
ZOMG ROFFLELOLO!!!1one *squee, hair twirl*

[Dingfod]

ZOMG ROFFLELOLO!!!1one *squee, hair twirl*Let's play horse. I'll be the front end and you be yourself.

[Gurdur]

Well, I still want see men back on top, ....
This explains your self-given title then.

[Alex Bragi]

Well, sure, "women down under" is a little known theory of Carl Jung’s. He hypothesised that when a woman is sexual submissive towards a man she’s actually acting out an inward expression of dominance. He theorised that women will often use sex as a means of getting exactly what they what—especially expensive items of jewellery and such. In fact, I believe it was Jung who also coined the expression, “ A man’s hard when he’s soft and soft when he’s hard”…. Pullleez!!! I’m kidding! I made the whole thing up. It’s not true! I’m just being idiotic and silly!!!

Oh, and Adora, please don't start another rant. This is not, I repeat - not, meant to be taken seriously. Ok? :giggle:

Gurdur, it's just Aussie slang: living in Australia (and enjoying it). :) But now that you mention it, it's kind of appropriate isn't it? :giggle:

[Gurdur]

Gurdur, it's just Aussie slang: living in Australia (and enjoying it). :) But now that you mention it, it's kind of appropriate isn't it? :giggle:
*cough*
On another thread, I welcomed you here (and welcome again ! Good to see you here), and I mentioned I am an Aussie, though now ex-pat.

[Adora]

Oh, and Adora, please don't start another rant. This is not, I repeat - not, meant to be taken seriously. Ok? :giggle:
Oh. Mawh. Gawd! *squeal* Hee hee. I'm like, so totally glad you like, explained that too me and stuff. Cos, y'knooowww, some of us don't like, read Jung or anything. OMG! Could you believe that! Like EW!!11one :giggle:

[Gurdur]

Adora,
is there any reason for this spate of trolling on your part ?
It seems very ungracious when directed against a newcomer, and very unnecessary; is there any reason why you're doing this, on a thread meant purely to be a fun thread ?

[flopstock]

In fact, the entire body of the post presents itself, quite obviously, as just that.
Unfortunately, the words "I think", "I believe", and "My opinion is" are missing too much from certain statements she makes for me to believe this.

is it possible
I guess
Oh sure, I'm sure it went on
I would wager
So, is it 'mannish',
I think
disappointing to me that women's liberation has spoilt certain aspects of sex.
It's just not fair! I want
I still want
do you believe
but what do you think about it?

Then perhaps you need to be paying more attention. I grabbed these phrases with just a brief rescan of her post. The fact that you choose not to believe, is not a validation of your arguments.

And speaks of generalizations. I'll hazard a guess here that she added this as a point of interest. So, what?
So I object to stupidity. I then exchanged my thoughts and opinions on her post. She got what she was fishing for, even if it wasn't in the form she expected.

If I were looking at this post on a creative writing thread you might have a valid point. But I don't see anything in this thread to indicate she's looking to be critiqued so that she might improve her writing style and fact presentation. She is simply asking for personal feedback on the questions she's asking. I ask again, do you have any personal thoughts or responses to share on this thread?

Fun is good. You should try it some time, Adora.
I would have thought my past explanations about my interaction on this board would have given you insight to my activities here, Crumb. Obviously, you lost your glasses that day.

You know that thing other people have when they laugh and/or feel happy.
ZOMG ROFFLELOLO!!!1one *squee, hair twirl*[/quote]

Not to be critical child, but it really would be best if you assign quotes to the correct person. I wrote none of this, and assume someone named Crumb actually did. So I won't comment on them.
Not to worry though, I make my share of mistakes too.

[viscousmemories]

Adora,
is there any reason for this spate of trolling on your part ?
As she explained to me and Crumb, she stopped posting here months ago because we're all just too stupid for her. She's a busy woman, see, with a real life. So naturally there are a limited number of online forums she can troll in her free time. My guess is that we owe her surprise visit last night to the fact that her knickers were in a twist about something and she can't get away with verbal diarrheah at her regular haunts without being edited and/or banned. I don't expect she'll be around much, but I could be wrong. She seems pretty fiercly infatuated with Alex Bragi.

[Johnny Pneumatic]

Whoever the first one to boink me will be, I hope she'll want to be on top. So sexy.
I'll take any kind of non-kinky sex though. No whips, no bondage. That stuff is just weird. What if she leaves me tied down? She doesn't HAVE to undo the ropes. She could beat the crap out of me and there's nothing I could do. :scared:

[Sweetie]

But, seriously, do you believe women's movement has helped or hindered our sex lives? Are men sometimes perhaps intimidated by women with a sex drives as strong, or stronger than their own, or do most find it a big turn on? Does it perhaps depend on how secure the man is with his own sexuality?

I'm neither dominant nor passive in the bedroom, neither on top all the time or on the bottom all the time, just whatever works. Change things up a bit, etc.

Has the sexual revolution helped or hindered our sex lives? I think it's improved it because we feel free to do whatever feels good to us as opposed to being forced into one specific idea. Feeling free means feeling less inhibited which is always good I think. Feeling insecure or shy or embarassed to have a natural sexuality I think could very easily lead to women especially, not really enjoying their sexuality. So it's improved however, I think kindof a best of both worlds type of thing is good. Sometimes the old way is good.

[Gurdur]

I'll take any kind of non-kinky sex though. No whips, no bondage. That stuff is just weird. What if she leaves me tied down? She doesn't HAVE to undo the ropes. She could beat the crap out of me and there's nothing I could do. :scared:
If it was lisarea, she wouldn't even need ropes.









* stalking lisarea still *

[Beth]

Dang, well, Lisa might go for scarves, then?

I know that is my bondage device of choice:P

[Adora]

She is simply asking for personal feedback on the questions she's asking. I ask again, do you have any personal thoughts or responses to share on this thread?
I would have thought it was obvious that, considering my questions and comments above, I thought her generalisations (which were the parts she did not use the cute little qualifiers for) were a load of bullshit. Figure it out, genius.

Not to be critical child, but it really would be best if you assign quotes to the correct person.
And maybe, just maybe, I expect people to recognise what parts they wrote and what they didn't, and where my reply no longer applies to what they said, with or without indicators. Obviously, I'm overestimating your intelligence.

My guess is that we owe her surprise visit last night to the fact that her knickers were in a twist about something and she can't get away with verbal diarrheah at her regular haunts without being edited and/or banned.
Awh, c'mon VM. Do you really think I'd hang around places where I couldn't get away with such things, if I'm zomg such a terrible person?

[viscousmemories]

Awh, c'mon VM. Do you really think I'd hang around places where I couldn't get away with such things, if I'm zomg such a terrible person?
When did I say you're a terrible person? I just meant you seem to have come in last night with a bug up your ass and took it out on the first person who said something that annoyed you. Then apparently found every other thread she made and sniped at her there too. I realize you think you're just a straight-shootin' womyn doin' right by your gen-dah, but to me it seems like petty, vicious bullshit. But I don't think you're a terrible person at all.

[Adora]

I just meant you seem to have come in last night with a bug up your ass and took it out on the first person who said something that annoyed you.
You're mistaking the cause as the symptom. But I expect as much from you, considering you doll out the phrase "petty vicious bullshit" without realising some people might think that was the driving force behind the founding of this forum, and all.

[viscousmemories]

You're mistaking the cause as the symptom.
Oh, I see. So you came by looking for some stimulating conversation and simply felt compelled to shit all over Alex Bragi, and then the whole lot of us (now I remember why I left here, retards, stupid, blah blah), by the sheer offensiveness of her posts. And you claim to be uninvested in Internet discussions? Okay.

But I expect as much from you, considering you doll out the phrase "petty vicious bullshit" without realising some people might think that was the driving force behind the founding of this forum, and all.
I actually know some people think that, Adora. Fortunately I don't lose any sleep over the opinion of people who have most likely done nothing to deserve my interest or respect.

[Godwhacker]

That is, women have assumed more responsibility for financially supporting the family than men have assumed for caring for the house and family.
This is not true. Women do as much housework as they did before, on top of working full or part-time jobs. Overall in both Australia and America, nothing has changed except pressures on women to join the workforce by an economic rationalist set of governments who do not then try and support these women in their endeavours to gain employment.

Hochschild (1989) interviewed 50 two-career couples and found that the women worked 15 hours more each week than their husbands did.
Maybe you missed English class, but one survey does not a plural make, especially when the data you quote does not support the claims you assert.

I wonder if its somewhat generational. I notice that the Baby Boomers in this neighborhood, I would say that it looks like the women do more than the men. But I also notice that the people my wife and I's age, the next generation down (or is it up??), tend to balance the load more. At least for my wife and I, I think we are more used to having both of us work at our jobs, so we tend to either share tasks, or alternate them. She read this and agreed, so this isn't just my end of things. Then again, I don't consider myself a stereotypical American male, so maybe that is part of it too.

I would also say that the women's movement has maybe led to a crisis for men who are bound up in the traditional stereotypical male role. I think it has allowed others of us to feel better about breaking out of that role, and doing things like express our feelings more openly, take care of our children and our homes more, and improve the quality of our relationships by making them more balanced.

[Adora]

And you claim to be uninvested in Internet discussions? Okay.
No, I don't. Just not as invested as you, quite obviously.

Fortunately I don't lose any sleep over the opinion of people who have most likely done nothing to deserve my interest or respect.
No, but you keep on hitting the reply button. Kudos to you.

[viscousmemories]

And you claim to be uninvested in Internet discussions? Okay.
No, I don't. Just not as invested as you, quite obviously.
I suspect the same could be said about all of our respective social interactions.

No, but you keep on hitting the reply button. Kudos to you.
Well don't worry, if you're one of the people who thinks livius and I invested all the money, energy and time we have into developing this site is because of some "petty vicious bullshit" then I won't bother hitting it for much longer.

[Adora]

I suspect the same could be said about all of our respective social interactions.
You're so cute when you're petty, vicious and bullshitting.

[viscousmemories]

You're so cute when you're petty, vicious and bullshitting.
I've never claimed to be above petty and vicious, but I promise I'm not bullshitting.

[flopstock]

She is simply asking for personal feedback on the questions she's asking. I ask again, do you have any personal thoughts or responses to share on this thread?
I would have thought it was obvious that, considering my questions and comments above, I thought her generalisations (which were the parts she did not use the cute little qualifiers for) were a load of bullshit. Figure it out, genius.

Not to be critical child, but it really would be best if you assign quotes to the correct person.
And maybe, just maybe, I expect people to recognise what parts they wrote and what they didn't, and where my reply no longer applies to what they said, with or without indicators. Obviously, I'm overestimating your intelligence.

My guess is that we owe her surprise visit last night to the fact that her knickers were in a twist about something and she can't get away with verbal diarrheah at her regular haunts without being edited and/or banned.
Awh, c'mon VM. Do you really think I'd hang around places where I couldn't get away with such things, if I'm zomg such a terrible person?

Unfortunately child ,I think the problem is that you overestimate yours. She asked questions. Proper feedback would be to answer the questions. You still haven't. And you give every appearance of being unable to. Which is fine, no need to be embarrassed. You are young. Life experiences will come.

I just wish that these off topic comments had been moved off to its own thread. Seems wrong somehow, that it ruin a thread created with the best of intentions. Really kind of of juvenile, don't you think? I apologize to Alex and promise to not continue the 'veering off'.

[viscousmemories]

I just wish that these off topic comments had been moved off to its own thread. Seems wrong somehow, that it ruin a thread created with the best of intentions. Really kind of of juvenile, don't you think? I apologize to Alex and promise to not continue the 'veering off'.
I thought Alex might like the thread to be split but unfortunately the on-topic comments are pretty thoroughly tangled up with the detritus at this point. I'm not even sure which posts would stay and which would go. I'm sorry too, Alex and everyone else, for my part in the derailment.

[Ensign Steve]

Wow. Somebody posts a bunch of opinions and says "what do you think?" and then somebody hits reply and disagrees. This is trolling?

[Dingfod]

It is when they also go over to their welcome thread and spew a bunch of hate and discontent.

[Gurdur]

Wow. Somebody posts a bunch of opinions and says "what do you think?" and then somebody hits reply and disagrees. This is trolling?
Actually, 3 threads now and maybe 4, including the welcome thread, where Adora has gone out of her way to nastily attack Alex Bragi, a newcomer, apparently for no real reason.

Trolling ? I think so. Definitely. And baiting. And all so senselessly, Alex Bragi being a newcomer and all.

This kind of behaviour can quickly lead to the death of boards, if repeated and not somehow tackled. Calling trolling what it is, trolling, seems more than apt and also a good first step.
My own interest is in not standing by while a newcomer gets nastily attacked.

[Adora]

She asked questions. Proper feedback would be to answer the questions. You still haven't. And you give every appearance of being unable to.
Considering the OP (and everybody else on this board) is unable to tell the difference between women's lib and sexual lib, I suppose everybody's bringing the stupid. I could give her feedback if she decided which one she was supposedly blaming for whatever problems she perceives it's done to her sexual life, but I don't think even she knows the difference between the two. When she works it out, I'll pat her on the head and give her a cookie. Promise.

[Alex Bragi]

Considering the OP (and everybody else on this board) is unable to tell the difference between women's lib and sexual lib, I suppose everybody's bringing the stupid. I could give her feedback if she decided which one she was supposedly blaming for whatever problems she perceives it's done to her sexual life, but I don't think even she knows the difference between the two. When she works it out, I'll pat her on the head and give her a cookie. Promise.

Adora, I agree the two are poles apart. I think everyone realises the differences between the two, so please don't trouble yourself to give us tiresome definitions.

I think, however, if you re-read my posting you will see there is absolutely no mention of 'sexual liberation'. (I've actually started another thread "Take the Sexual Revolution Further" which is linked to that topic.)

My question in simple terms was-- has women's liberation in any way spoilt sexual enjoyment for men and/or women.

I reiternate, was just a light-hearted look at a topic that interests me.

Many of the responses have been interesting and thought provoking, and I've enjoyed them very much. I feel it's unfortunate that you've felt the desperate need to hijack this thread with your vicious and petty snipping. If, however, you must put other down in order to buoy your own self-confidence, I can live with that.

[D. Scarlatti]

(... everybody else on this board) is unable to tell the difference between women's lib and sexual lib ...

But most can tell the difference between a lighthearted missive and a dyspeptic little twat.

[Western]

I thought "lib" stood for libido and was like "the fuck". It all makes so much more sense and so much less entertainment now....

[Clutch Munny]

Seriously, is www.japanesearchiecomics.wow down or something?

[Shake]

And you claim to be uninvested in Internet discussions? Okay.
No, I don't. Just not as invested as you, quite obviously.

Fortunately I don't lose any sleep over the opinion of people who have most likely done nothing to deserve my interest or respect.
No, but you keep on hitting the reply button. Kudos to you.
Pot. Kettle. Black. (re: hitting the reply button)

[Adora]

I think, however, if you re-read my posting you will see there is absolutely no mention of 'sexual liberation'. (I've actually started another thread "Take the Sexual Revolution Further" which is linked to that topic.)
Actually, honey, the entire "Who's on top" ethos is sexual lib dogma. It has nothing to do with women's lib, which is all about female sexual automony. But you, for some reason, are claiming it's women's lib that has done this, probably because whilst you claim to be able to tell the difference between the two, you don't know squat. Which isn't surprising in the least. Whilst you deny wanting a definition, it sounds like you need one, but I'll keep it short so you don't have to tire out those brain cells too much:

Sexual Liberation: 1970s movement that claimed to open up more possibilities in the expression of heterosexuality backed up by sexologists such as Masters and Johnson and the philisophies of the human potential movement. It's questionable whether it did this though, since it still kept a sexual hierarchy with coitus at the top, just like all the old ones it claimed to reject. Sexual lib was responsible for the promotion of the supposed power of women's sexual drives, using various sex surveys since Kinsey started his work in the middle of the century.

Women's Liberation: A long-running movement focusing not just on sexuality but all aspects of women's lives. The women's liberation philosophy on women's sexuality has always been female sexual autonomy - ie, definition of female sexuality without relation to sexist reproductive heterosexual coitus, and more specifically, a definition of female sexuality without heterosexual coitus at the top. Therefore, it has nothing to do with women "being on top".

Capiche?

[Alex Bragi]

Actually, honey, the entire "Who's on top" ethos is sexual lib dogma. It has nothing to do with women's lib,...


Oh, ok. I understand what you on about now.

Ok, the term 'top' as I've used it here, has nothing to do with feminism or sexual liberation. When I said ‘being the top’ rather than ‘being on top’, what I was referring to is ‘top’ as in dominant. As in the term used to describe a dominant verses a submissive. Still unclear? Ok, what I was talking about was just good old-fashioned kinky sex! BDSM to be more precise. The reference was nothing more than a pun, a play on words. So, you see, all you had to really do was ask.

[Adora]

Ok, what I was talking about was just good old-fashioned kinky sex! BDSM to be more precise. The reference was nothing more than a pun, a play on words. So, you see, all you had to really do was ask.
Hahahahahahaha XD. You can't honestly tell me anyone who would read your thread could possibly get that meaning from your use of phrases. Fucking A man. I'm going to show this to some of my BDSM friends now so they can get a laugh out of it. BWUAHAHAHAHAHAHHA.

Still: BDSM- nothing to do with women's lib. C'mon. I'll give you one more try to put another spin on your post. You can do it. Sure you can! Just give it a try. Do it for your country!

[justaman]

Adora who exactly gives a fuck about the semantic etymology of the title of this fucking thread?? She's making a quite simple, quite straight forward point that you are desperately trying to represent as being convoluted for whatever reason.

I really can't work out whether you are wantonly misrepresenting Alex because of your weird random-flaming fetish, or because you are just particularly unintelligent. Assuming the worst, she's asking for people's opinions about how they like to fuck. How do you fuck? I mean assuming you actually do understand the point at this juncture, do you like being ravaged? Or are you a submissive little black sheep? Do you fuck? Have you ever been slapped during sex and did you like it?

[Adora]

She's making a quite simple, quite straight forward point that you are desperately trying to represent as being convoluted for whatever reason.
I'm not trying to represent her post as anything except a fucking load of bullshit, which I'm calling her on. Is that straight forward and simple enough for your little brain to wrap itself around?

[justaman]

I'm not trying to represent her post as anything except a fucking load of bullshit, which I'm calling her on.
Yes, and you're doing a very good job, precious. :pat:

Problem is that she is asking how people - especially women - enjoy being fucked. It's kind of stupid to say that it is a "load of bullshit", then, since it really doesn't make any sense.

So if you have any inclination whatsoever to cease looking so trivial, how do you like to be fucked?

Is that straight forward and simple enough for your little brain to wrap itself around?
Having my intelligence called into question by you is rather like having my weight called into question by Amanda Vanstone. :D

[flopstock]

hey justaman

are you the one that started the thread on when folks got laid last? That cracked me up! I especially liked that man wife team..but I have to admit I started worrying for you ...how's that going lately?

Really dear, it was a very funny and entertaining thread to step into, my first day in here. good job and idea!

diane

[justaman]

hey justaman

are you the one that started the thread on when folks got laid last? That cracked me up! I especially liked that man wife team..but I have to admit I started worrying for you ...how's that going lately?

Really dear, it was a very funny and entertaining thread to step into, my first day in here. good job and idea!

diane
Danke Shon :bowing:

No need for concern, you'll be happy to know I've been upping my stats recently and keeping the home-fires burning. :cool: Never under-estimate the power of Aqua di Gio.

[Adora]

Problem is that she is asking how people - especially women - enjoy being fucked.
Can you read, or did you totally miss all the information she inserted beforehand? Once again: I don't care how people fuck. That's none of my business. I'm calling her on her bullshit she thought was somehow relevant to her post and the points she made before she asked the questions. Want me to draw you a diagram, kiddo?

[Alex Bragi]

Fucking A man. I'm going to show this to some of my BDSM friends now so they can get a laugh out of it. BWUAHAHAHAHAHAHHA

Please give the onomatopoeia a rest.

[Adora]

Only if you promise to stop PMing me thinking I'm going to stop being antagonistic towards you.

[justaman]

Can you read, or did you totally miss all the information she inserted beforehand? Once again: I don't care how people fuck. That's none of my business.
Well given that's the whole point of the thread what the fuck are you doing here?

I'm calling her on her bullshit she thought was somehow relevant to her post and the points she made before she asked the questions.
Hey, awesome. :super:

But why, exactly? You just enjoy being trivial or...?
Want me to draw you a diagram, kiddo?
Oh you can draw, can you?! Good girl. :yup:

[Western]

Wow- the drama never stops @ FF?

[Adora]

Well given that's the whole point of the thread what the fuck are you doing here?
Your interpretation of the "point" of this thread and mine are obviously very different.

[Dingfod]

Wow - I think someone should use the Ignore feature.

[justaman]

Your interpretation of the "point" of this thread and mine are obviously very different.
But, seriously, do you believe women's movement has helped or hindered our sex lives? Are men sometimes perhaps intimidated by women with a sex drives as strong, or stronger than their own, or do most find it a big turn on? Does it perhaps depend on how secure the man is with his own sexuality?

I really don't want to get too personal here, but what do you think about it?
Emphasis mine. Are you still confused, pumpkin tits?

Perhaps you'd just like to go away and draw a nice picture. :yup:

[Adora]

Ladies, is it possible to imagine anything more erotically decadent and luxurious than being on the bottom? No, no, no! I'm no talking about being the bottom! I talking about being on the bottom—literally—laying back on that big old bed and letting him do all the hard yakka and sweating while you close your eyes and just enjoy it all. Yes, good old fashioned him on top of her sex!

In years gone, I guess it was considered rather unmanly for a man to allow a woman to be on top. Oh sure, I'm sure it went on, but I'm also sure it wasn't ever talked about, especially amongst the fairer sex. In fact I would wager it would have been thought of as rather kinky. Women, or more correctly—‘ladies', just weren't meant to get aroused sufficiently to want take a man sexually. It was considered unnatural for a woman to feel that way. In "The Merchant's Tale', Chaucer described an aroused woman as "mannish". And, in "Tom Jones", Henry Fiedling declared, "I dare to swear the wench was willing as he!"

So, is it 'mannish', or in appropriate, for a woman to take control during sex and place herself on top? Well, of course it damn well is!

Men are physically stronger than women, they're meant to be the active partner during sex. It's the way they're built—strong arms and legs for supporting themselves over their delicate and venerated women.

Women,on the other hand, have soft cushiony butts to rest back on during sex and bodies that are soft and smooth-- ideal for pumping up and down on.

I think it just dandy that men have discovered that women don't lose half their brain cells when they get married, that their perfectly capable of balancing a cheque book, and equally qualified to assess and have a say in how their country is run. It is, however, rather disappointing to me that women's liberation has spoilt certain aspects of sex. Once upon a time sex was no effort at all for a woman. It was all lay back and enjoy, "Take me. Take me! I'm yours!" Now, thanks to the likes of the Blue Stocking Brigade, he wants a piece of the action, or rather lack of it, too!

It's just not fair! I want to see women liberated from this kind of women's liberation!

Maybe life isn't always fair? Maybe it isn't all about getting what you want? If it was, I'd be laying naked on a topical island, an icey margarita in one hand and fan in the other, while Ben Affleck (also naked) laid on top of me panting, sweating, and working his cute little butt off as.... Ah, but I digress.

Well, I still want see men back on top, exactly where they belong, serving and pleasuring women everywhere!

But, seriously, do you believe women's movement has helped or hindered our sex lives? Are men sometimes perhaps intimidated by women with a sex drives as strong, or stronger than their own, or do most find it a big turn on? Does it perhaps depend on how secure the man is with his own sexuality?

I really don't want to get too personal here, but what do you think about it?


Que?

[flopstock]

Wow - I think someone should use the Ignore feature.
I think I recognize you!! You're part of the husband wife team aren't you?..should consider going on the road with that routine..very fun to read! :popcorn:

[flopstock]

Not to intrude on the childs rendition of 'the exorcist', but since there are so many fellas up, how about a nice description of how you like to be fucked. Is there an ideal scenario you envision when you imagine the 'little lady' having her way with you?
Is Alex around? She'd know how to spice up what i'm asking.. :chin:

[Gurdur]

Having my intelligence called into question by you is rather like having my weight called into question by Amanda Vanstone. :D
Fine, fine, to balance everything out, I'm giving you major points for that one-liner, justaman. Good serve, good serve. Almost game, set and match.

[Dingfod]

Wow - I think someone should use the Ignore feature.
I think I recognize you!! You're part of the husband wife team aren't you?..should consider going on the road with that routine..very fun to read! :popcorn:Meh, everyday life at Rancho Estrogeno.

[Crumb]

how about a nice description of how you like to be fucked. Is there an ideal scenario you envision when you imagine the 'little lady' having her way with you?
Well, variety is the spice of life. I am all for trying out every arrangment in the book. However, I have a fond affection for the various female superior positions. I would rather not get much more specific than that. :shy2:

[inland wave]

Meh, everyday life at Rancho Estrogeno.[/QUOTE]
yeah, whatever..... :yawn:

[Dingfod]

Meh, everyday life at Rancho Estrogeno.
yeah, whatever..... :yawn:Kiss my grits! -- Florence Jean Castleberry