BigMat

Active Members
  • Content count

    70
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by BigMat

  1. I think I have stated as much on here before that, into my early thirties, I was adamant about only marrying a virgin. God began working with me around that time about this issue and completely changed my views on it. Christ sets the example for what a husband is. Being that God is flawless and holy, by his very nature he requires a bride that is also flawless and holy. We as his bride, do not happen to be either of these things. We are very flawed, very imperfect. Does Christ reject his bride because she doesn't happen to fit the parameters that his holy nature requires? No he does not. If he did, he wouldn't be a husband and would be no more worthy of us than we are of him. Instead, He loves us so powerfully, so passionately that he takes the burden of imperfection from our shoulders and transfers it to his own so that we might meet the requirements of being the bride to a perfect being. He carries that burden for us so that we can be his perfect flawless bride. That is what a husband does. It is what any man who would be a husband must do. He must love a woman to the extent that he carries the burdens of her past and present, freeing her from them within the bounds of their relationship. As a result, she becomes free to be the wife he needs and desires, she becomes free to pursue her potential as such. The love of a husband is such that, no matter her past, the woman he married will always be his virgin. She will always be seen, loved, and cherished as his and his alone. As a result, it is not her past actions that define her in the eyes of her husband but, it is instead his love for her, who she is as a person, and who she continues to become. If a marriage can't be started from a blank slate then, it is likely to fail or be a source of misery for both parties involved. The key to this is love. The issue isn't whether or not a non-virgin single mother is worthy of a virgin guy. The issue is, is the guy's love great enough to make him worthy of her. Is his love for her great enough and powerful enough to make her history and her present circumstances a non-issue? If not, then his love for her is not husbandly love and he his unworthy of her. The issue isn't perfect or imperfect, virgin or non-virgin; the issue is love -- husbandly love. I've seen it on this forum time after time, endlessly on other forums, and in countless other places. Guys will find their "dream woman" -- a woman who they think is their perfect match. The only problem is that they can't get over the woman's past -- sexual and/or otherwise. I have the answer for these guys. WALK AWAY. If you are having problems with this, it means that however great your love for this woman might be, it is something a great deal less than husbandly love and, it therefore makes you unworthy of this woman and her love for you. A husband's love for and, his enamorment of his bride/wife is so powerful, so white hot, so pure that he will gladly live with and carry in his own heart whatever less than desirable things her past might hold, just so he can enjoy, cherish, and be joined as one with the beauty that presently resides within her. If the "King of Kings and Lord of Lords" doesn't insist that any of us have a past history of absolute perfection then, we certainly are not entitled to it. For me to believe that I am so entitled or, for me to insist on virginity would be for me to consider myself higher than God. I am not. I don't come anywhere close. As far as children are concerned, if a woman loves her children then they are a part of her heart. To love her wholely, as a husband should, any man that would be married to her, must also love her children. If he chooses not to then, he chooses not to love the woman in her entirety. @Queen I read your post before you edited it. Here is something for you and any woman who might be in the situation you were in. The only reason for divorce, mentioned in the Bible, is infidelity. That stated, does the wisdom, guidance, and instruction of an infinite being end at the last few pages of Revelation? Can all the guidance that this never-ending being have to share with every single person that, ever has or ever will exist, be contained within the pages of a millennia old text that fits in the palm of your hand? I'd say that what God has to share with us, is as He is; it is without end -- as are the individual and varying situations and circumstances of we humans. For a being such as God, the Bible is but one conversation -- a single exhaled breath -- and indeed, it is but one of countless conversations each of us should have with Him. The Bible is only the very tip of the iceberg. It is up to each of us to endlessly explore and go deeper into His being -- to ever learn more of his guidance, his wisdom, his love, and his beauty. Everyone can agree that a husband and a wife are both required components for a marriage to exist. If there is only a wife or only a husband then there is no marriage. Over the past twenty one years, God has taught and demonstrated to me, through the relationship that I share with him, what a husband is and what a husband's love is. A male who abuses the woman he married (physically, emotionally, mentally -- whatever the case), has chosen to not be a husband and in doing so, has made whatever marriage there might have been, nonexistent -- that is, if it was ever truly a marriage to begin with. If there is no husband, there is no marriage and therefore, there is no wrongdoing on the part of a woman who leaves such a situation. At most what you have is someone who is walking away from a dangerous, very damaging, potentially life threatening living arrangement and, NOTHING MORE than that. She can't possibly divorce a husband if there isn't one to divorce. The animal beating and berating her has chosen to be something far less than a husband -- in fact, something far less than a man. A man is something a male chooses to be by his actions. The same is true for a husband; it is something a man chooses to be by his actions. "Man," "husband," "father" -- a guy is not any of these just because he says so or, because he is labeled so. He can only be these things if he makes a solid effort and works hard to be such an individual. Just because a guy stands at the alter or in front of a judge and promises to be a husband doesn't mean he is one. He only becomes a husband when he chooses by way of his ongoing behavior and daily deeds to be one. I will state it again -- a woman who is with a male who chooses by way of his actions to not be a husband cannot possibly be terminating a marriage if she leaves, because a marriage cannot possibly exist without a husband. A woman in such a situation who files for "divorce" is merely satisfying the law and protecting herself legally. She is simply putting an end to the brutal handiwork that the guy wasn't man enough to put a stop to himself. So that she might move on and actually have a life, she is closing out and walking away from something that the guy already ended. Specifically, she is walking away from the male's unfulfilled oath and broken promise of a lifelong marital union. Here is something to consider. I know a guy, who is in his fifties and has been single his entire life. Most people wouldn't think much of him but, he is far more a man than any of these rabid animals who abuse the women they are with. He decided during his early adulthood to remain single for the rest of his life. The reason being, he despises men who beat women. He realized that his temper was volatile enough that, he had the very real potential to become the thing he hated so, he chose to make sure that never happened by spending his life as a single bachelor. If a guy is mentally unwell to the extent that he cannot keep his anger from causing him to abuse and hurt others -- particularly a wife or children -- he has the option to not become a subhuman animal; he just has to be man enough to choose it.
  2. Is this normal? No. It is not normal for a male to behave this way if he has made a conscious decision and commitment to be a man. In fact, this is inappropriate behavior for any guy -- whether he has chosen to be a man or something less than one. I advise you to end your association with him right away as I assume that, like any intelligent self respecting woman, your desire is to have a relationship only with a guy who chooses to be a gentleman. A mere four weeks or so into interacting with you, this individual has revealed what his true intentions are and, they aren't in any way the intentions of a gentleman. He is not investing his time and attention into you so that he might get to know you, so that he might discover your beauty and who you are as a person. If your heart is what he desired, this is what he would be pursuing. Instead he is pursuing your body or rather, the use of your body to temporarily satisfy his lust. He is not endeavoring to fall in love with who you are as a person; he is endeavoring to use you for sex. As such, he is not a man, much less a gentleman -- he has chosen to be something less than these things. If a male is only willing to talk about sex with you then, that's the only part of you or your life that he is interested in. If he doesn't desire your heart far more than he desires your body then, he is unsuitable for a romantic relationship. If his desire is to use you as a means to pleasure himself, rather than to love and respect you then, you shouldn't invest any part of your life or yourself into him. You laid down some personal boundaries when you let this guy know that you are not comfortable or okay with showing him your naked body. He has repeatedly demonstrated that he doesn't have even the basic love or respect of a friend for you because he disregards those boundaries, continually pushing you to share pornographic photos of yourself. In the beginning the two of you talked and shared. You gave him a taste of your heart and who you are as a person -- you gave him a glimpse of your beauty. His actions have made it apparent that this isn't a part of you that he found appealing or interesting enough to pursue, as demonstrated by the fact that every time you talk, he pursues sex rather than your heart, your mind, and your emotions. The moment he finds out he isn't going to get anything sexual out of you, he hangs up -- he is done with you. You have nothing else to offer that he wants. He doesn't desire your heart, your intellect, your love, your true beauty -- anything other than using you as a means to sexually gratify himself. It has been a month. You've seen who he is and what he wants from you. Dump him today and move on. You are worthy of so much more than this individual.
  3. Anything is possible -- perhaps even likely if you've chosen to be a man, be strong, and use your brain. Hitting on that note, I think you are quite aware that the chances of you holding on to your principles and integrity are substantially diminished by putting yourself into a situation where you are not only tempted but also, have significant peer pressure to shirk your manhood and behave as an uncivilized animal. Come on dude, you know better -- if you didn't, you wouldn't be asking this question. Be a man; choose an admirable path and stay on it. Being a man isn't always going to be easy. It requires sacrifice -- a price to be paid -- but, that's what makes we males who have chosen to be men such a valuable commodity in this culture where so many choose to be something less.
  4. I honestly don't know. As far back as I can remember, into my childhood, it has just always been a part of me -- you don't have sex with a person unless you are married to them. Even before I knew exactly what sex was (at least the mechanics of it anyway) I was inclined to save it for marriage. When I began my close intimate walk with God in my early twenties, my already strong stance on waiting strengthened and intensified exponentially. I turned forty one a couple of weeks ago and am still saving my virginity for when (if) I choose to get married.
  5. 1. Does being called a virgin make you feel bad about yourself? Has it ever? I can't say that anyone has ever "called" me a virgin. That stated, I don't have a problem sharing with others that I am one. It's not something that I am ashamed of. I've always been of the mind that saving sex for marriage is the right thing to do and that, I am making the appropriate decision to remain a virgin until I get married. To be honest, until I joined this forum -- nearly five years ago now -- I sort of lived in a bubble of my own making and just assumed that more people than not remained virgins until they were married. I was aware that premarital sex was prevalent in our society; I didn't realize just how prevalent. That stated, while I don't feel bad about myself, it does often hurt that I have never had the intimate, bonding, marital friendship with a woman that, for me, sex would be a part of. 2. Have you ever been teased for it? What happened? How'd it make you feel? I don't ever recall being teased about my virginity. I'm a big dude with a serious, no nonsense demeanor. That's a combination that doesn't really inspire teasing from others, particularly the variety of childish, immature non-adults who would misuse their time and energy for something like that. 3. Do you even care what people think? why/why not? Not really. I am my own man. People generally fall in line with me, not the other way around. I would however, care what people thought if I slept around and, by doing so, gave others the idea that it was acceptable for them to do the same. My nephew has been in my care his entire life. I've raised him as my own son. If he had observed me, for nearly the past eighteen years, bringing women home and into my bed and staying out late or overnight at their houses, what would that have taught him? What kind of example would that have set for him? He would think it's perfectly acceptable to carouse around and have sex whenever and with whomever his hormonal whimsy dictated. Instead, with the example I've set for him, he knows better. In that regard, I do care what others think. 4. Did you ever feel it was a pejorative term during your teenage years? Do you feel the same way about the term now? I imagine in some circles it was childishly bandied about as a negative term. I don't really know for certain though, as I never socialized enough in my teenage years for the subject to ever come up. Now, as a forty year old adult, I get the distinct impression that most people in my age group view middle aged virginity as an indication that there is something wrong with a person -- either psychologically or physically. In fact, I've even encountered that attitude on this website. I seem to have the opposite effect on people's perceptions though. When you own your virginity -- when your virginity is a conscious decision made by a strong decisive individual, rather than an unfortunate, pitiable thing that happened to a weak person who couldn't manage get rid of it -- you are respected for the choice you made. People tend to view your virginity the same way you view it. If you are ashamed of or embarrassed about your virginity then, other people are going to think there is something wrong with you, something you should be embarrassed about. If instead, you are confident and have no problem with your virginity then, other people will tend not to have a problem with it either.
  6. Wow.  The new format deleted all of my friends and my profile picture.  I guess it was time for a new one anyway.  This site swiped the other one from my gmail account when I joined nearly four years ago.

  7. Warning: Phishing site

    The site seems to be no longer broken. Definite thanks and gratitude to Mike for fixing things. It had become quite a chore to navigate around this place.
  8. Warning: Phishing site

    Both Firefox and Avast blocked this specific thread, though nothing else that I've experienced so far. I'd almost be willing to bet a wooden nickel that the donkey's rear who has been spamming this place the past few days had something to do with this. When given the option in my browser, I reported to Google that this wasn't a threatening site. What that's worth, I don't know. Edit: I'm getting it with various other threads now. That's very annoying. I do notice that when I click on a thread, in the address bar it takes me to a specific post in the thread, rather than to the main thread itself. It's never done that before on this site.
  9. I'm not one of the ladies but, I will answer anyway. Why does a guy get "freindzoned"? Because he isn't her "one" and she isn't his. If by some rare chance God intended that the guy be the one for her, for whatever reason, she rejected God's idea and he gives her the right to do that. God likely has other options lined up for her. Love is a choice. It is a willingly given gift. It's not something that's forced. Is there anything a guy can do to get out of this situation? Indeed there is. He can have some self respect and dignity and move on. He can find the woman that is his "one" and invest himself -- his time, his energy, his heart, and spirit -- into her instead of expending what belongs to her on someone else. For some reason most people think that romantic rejection is a horrible thing. It isn't. It's a blessing. It means that even if you can't see that a relationship -- and eventually marriage because that's the point of having a romantic relationship in the first place -- is not feasible or is a bad idea, thankfully the other person did realize it and, did you both a favor by not allowing it to happen. Romantic rejection is ultimately a blessing. Be grateful for it and move on.
  10. I've never been to that website before. For a first impression, I am seriously unimpressed. Where did they find that person at? Does just anyone get to dispense "advice" off of their website? From what I understand, that individual wrote this piece for a series of articles advising women how to find the man of their dreams. I wonder if that's a joke of some kind. If the "man of her dreams" is a selfish, self focused non-man who thinks women are little more than prostitutes to be purchased and used for their bodies and sexuality then I guess this article might be pertinent. Otherwise, it's simply selfish whining drivel. In writing this crusty little rant, all the "author" accomplished was to reveal a great deal about who he is as a person, rather than dispense any kind of sound advice. This person seems to be under the twisted and mistaken impression that a date is some sort of prostitutional business transaction, wherein the male is purchasing sex from a female by spending a few meager hours chatting with her and maybe paying for her dinner. I guess what this genius fails to realize is that she likely has actual friends to chat with and her own money to buy her own dinner. She doesn't need him for any of that. True adults -- even most adolescents -- understand that pre-marital or pre-engagement dating is so a couple can learn about each other and spend time in one another's company, primarily, to determine if they would like to continue to pursue a romantic relationship and, ultimately, spend their lives together. This guy thinks it's something you do do pay a hooker for sex. That says an awful lot about how he regards women and his lack of respect for their true worth and value. I was curious about this cowardly donkey who writes anonymously so, I did a few minutes worth of digging. I came across another article in the same series on the same website that, I can only assume was written by the same person because it mirrored the same twisted views and was also written anonymously. What's even more appalling is, his expanded elaboration that a date is a prostitutional transaction. In the piece entitled "Having Sex Is Not An Equal Exchange Of Energy For a Date" he shares his opinion that whatever sex he has "purchased" by going on a date with a woman and -- unbelievably -- paying for only his half, isn't worth it. The woman should somehow owe him not just sex but, something more as well for taking her out on a date. He goes so far as to make the ludicrous statement that the woman should actually be paying him, both for sex and for the date. I'd say he has a rather lofty opinion of his worth and value to the opposite gender. Perhaps HE is the only thing worthy of his time and effort. Considering that, maybe this guy should go out on a date with himself and repay himself by having intercourse with himself. That's the same expectation he has has for the women he dates. This is probably what would be best for everyone, both for him and for any woman unfortunate enough to encounter him.
  11. Re-introduction!

    It's nice to have you back.
  12. how can i stand strong?

    Welcome Clara. You are just starting your adulthood and getting things set up the way you want and need them to be in your life. That privilege and responsibility is solely yours and no one else's. No one but you gets a say in how your life is going to be. Saving the beauty of your body and the intimacy of sex for the man who marries you, the man who actually commits to sharing the rest of your life with you, is a very noble and wise decision. If you had a husband you both would share the life you are setting up so he would get to have a say in things. Your boyfriend, he made no such decision, commitment or, promise. If he had, he would be married to you. His life is his own and he can do whatever he wants with it. However, he has no rights and no say in how you run yours. If you choose not to have sex with men who don't love and think enough of you to be your husband and spend the rest of their life with you -- your current boyfriend included -- that is your decision and not his. If he can't or won't respect that and live with it free of complaint and harassment then it's an indication that he doesn't love you as he should, that he doesn't love you as you are entitled to be loved. As such he has absolutely no business being a part of your life. If however, he loves you enough to let you set your life up the way you feel is best and supports you in your decisions then, it is an indication that he loves you enough to want what's best for you and what you feel comfortable with. Such a man might be worthy of having a place in your world. A male who will only "love" you if you give him sex is a male who doesn't really love you at all. Saving sex for marriage weeds out those types of males so that you can find the man who truly will love, care about and, respect you. If you don't stand strong, protect and, take care of the life you have ahead of you, no one will and; that life will end up someplace you never wanted it to be. You must fight for your life and make a conscious effort to steer it in the direction you want. If you don't, someone else -- perhaps your boyfriend -- might take the wheel and drive it into the gutter.
  13. 50 Shades of Love?

    In my experience, Cora Jay, I don't think you are imagining things. Maybe it's where I live or maybe it's just random chance but, it seems that a great deal of females swoon over and choose males that are domineering and agressive -- usually to the point that these males are regularly disrespectful to females and frequently cross the line into being verbally and emotionally abusive to them. I've even seen social workers, counselors, those claiming to be hardcore feminists, mental health workers -- all people who staunchly advise women against such relationships -- latch on to the first "bad boy" or "alpha male" that comes along and proceed to have their nerves, dignity and, emotions trampled. I have seen many of them enter this type of relationship repeatedly. It defies logic, flies in the face of common sense and, boggles the mind. What I have concluded is that someone who chooses and finds this type of male attractive, hasn't yet matured into a woman. On some level they are still a girl -- an unmatured female. Likewise, neither do I regard the overly agressive type of male a man. In his heart, he has not grown and matured into a man. It can only be expected that an unmatured female would find herself attracted to an unmatured male. As for myself, as a man, I wouldn't even consider having a relationship with a female who finds bad boys, alphas, and domineering males attractive. Such a person has not yet become a woman in her heart. She has yet to develop the wisdom and sensibility that are hallmarks of womanhood. As a man, I only find women attractive. I am not romantically drawn to children or to a female who has anything less than the maturity of a full blown woman. You should be proud of yourself Cora Jay that, on a very important level, you have grown into a woman while so many around you are still little more than children -- essentially girls and adolescents chasing after males who are less than men. Regarding the Fifty Shades filth, I think most females who fantasize about this type of donkey manure, would find themselves deeply traumatized if they actually had to edure it in real life. As I stated above, they are not yet grown in heart and mind. It's much the same as the boy who imagines himself cutting down enemies left and right and fighting gloriously on the battlefield. He's not really a man until he becomes aware that such a scenario is literally Hell on Earth and that it's best to avoid it if at all possible.
  14. Have you ever been arrested?

    I've never been arrested or had any problems with law enforcement. I've been stopped a number of times driving, usually because I was speeding or technically breaking traffic laws but, I've never been issued a ticket which, is pretty amazing considering I'm 39 and have been driving my entire adult life. As a teenager I was walking around on rural family property in the middle of the night when I encountered several police officers who were present for a matter unrelated to me. I wasn't breaking any laws but, I did have a huge sixteen inch bowie knife strapped to my leg. They decided to briefly question me to see if I knew anything about what was going on. At first they didn't notice the knife. When one officer finally did, a bystander said the officer's jaw dropped and his eyes bugged out before he quickly unsnapped the sheath and removed the knife. After a bit of questioning, they returned my knife and left without incident. Several years ago I was heading out on a cross country trip on a cold, moonless, Winter night with my cousin when his car broke down nearly forty miles away from where I lived -- which was also the nearest town. I layered up a bunch of clothing and set out on foot for home, leaving him with the car. I had some pretty wicked hardware with me in the car but, left it all with my cousin and shoved a .357 revolver and ammo into a fanny pack. Less than two hours down the road a state trooper pulled up and asked if I wanted a ride into town. I gratefully accepted. Before he let me climb into his cage he asked if I had any weapons on me. I informed him of the revolver in the fanny pack and he indicated that because of department policy I would have to let it ride up front with him. I was clearly breaking state law by concealing a firearm on my person without a permit. However, I wasn't about to go walking down a highway in the middle of nowhere in the black of night without something to take care of trouble if it found me and I casually stated as much to the officer. He agreed that he wouldn't either and that was all that was said about the gun. He returned the .357 to me when he dropped me off at my house. I've heard lots of horror stories about police but, thankfully, in my personal experience, I've found most law enforcement to be pretty reasonable. I'm sure that's due in no small part to a certain amount of luck and the attitude and mindset of people who populate the small towns and rural areas I've always lived in. Something that also has a lot to do with it is my own attitude, my bearing, being polite and respectful and, being honest. It is due also to exercising common sense and not behaving like an idiot. That same night in my cousin's car I also had a 9mm Beretta and a big honking OA-93 AR15 handgun accompanied by a whole mess of loaded 30 round magazines. In contrast to the illegally concealed .357, if I had set out with the OA-93 dangling from my shoulder and a pouch full of magazines strapped to my hip, I would not have been breaking any laws because open carry of a handgun is legal where I live. That setup however, would quite likely have illicited a far less friendly reaction from the officer. I could have very possibly found myself looking down the barrel of his firearm as he ordered me to place my "weapon" on the ground and put my hands behind my head. For reference, the video linked below depicts an OA-93: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvYMf7p92K4
  15. How do you Men control yourselves?

    What urges? If you feel the urge to say lewd, unsavory and/or, disrespectful things to females when you are around them, I would reccommend you begin working on yourself so that you can grow and mature into a man. I'm inclined to believe most of the guys on here do their best to keep a clean, wholesome, respectful mind -- particularly when it comes to women. That's where it starts. A good place to begin is to rebuke yourself any time you catch your mind thinking less than admirable thoughts about anything, not just women. If you are not proud of the filth that's floating around in your mind then clean it up. If what you watch on TV or the music you listen to influences your thoughts in a direction you don't like then, stop putting that garbage into your consciousness. If the people you hang around have conversation and lifestyles that are less than laudable, change that area of your life as well. If you don't have trash thoughts in your mind about women to begin with then, you won't have to worry about hiding who you are and accidentally revealing to women what you truly think about them.
  16. Who here aspires to marry a wealthy man?

    What's not true? I am uncertain as to what part of my post you disagree with. I never indicated that a marriage based on materialistic desires couldn't survive. Nor did I claim that it was wrong to have materialistic preferences. I did point out many of the pitfalls, drawbacks, and consequences to the OP's extreme attitude and stance in this matter. Perhaps I was unclear and didn't express my thoughts and opinions as well as I thought I did. If that is the case, I apologize for any confusion my possible failure to communicate clearly might have caused.
  17. What Counts?

    When they were alive, I didn't need to look into my grandparent's bedroom and watch them "do it" just to know that that they were deeply in love with one another or, to even know that they still made love. These things were apparent without me seeing them do the act. The same principal holds true for stories. Choosing not to depict sex and nudity is not the same thing as lying about it. As I indicated in my previous post in this thread, a storyteller doesn't have to depict those things taking place to make it known that they happened. It can be stated that it took place or alluded to, as is generally the case in real life. I am an intelligent, perceptive guy. I don't need to actually see it happen to know that it did happen. I will never believe that this boils down to it being necessary to tell a story. I am of a firm mind that this is a matter of people in this culture desiring to be entertained by other people's sex and nudity. That's what they want so that's what's given to them. It's the same with the aformentioned violence. It's easier on the conscience to claim that watching these things is okay so long as they are incorporated into a storyline. The end result is the same, storyline or not. People were entertained and derived satisfaction by watching other people's spouses and romantic interests bear their nakedness and perform sex acts. I just don't see how someone could truly believe in their heart that it's okay to watch such a thing. Don't misunderstand. I'm no innocent. Over the years I have watched a lot of the same pornography in movies and TV shows that everyone else has. That being stated, I'm certainly not going to purport that it was okay for me to have done so, even if it was incorporated into a storyline. I wholeheartedly agree that sex, sexuality, and the human body are a part of life. That fact doesn't preclude something from being pornography or, make it okay when; what should be a private, intimate, personal act, is shared publicly or with the world, particularly if it is to entertain and please an audiance. Anyway, who says I miss out on otherwise well crafted stories. The "skip to next scene" button on the DVD remote works flawlessly. I can bypass the pornographic scenes -- and any overly violent scenes as well -- and watch the movie without hardly skipping a beat. You know what? Shows don't seem to lose anything or be any less complete when I choose not to view those scenes, which leads me to conclude that they are unecessary. That includes the movie "Braveheart" which, I have watched a number of times over the years -- sans the pornography that Mel Gibson felt it necessary to put himself into. I do want to commend you for refusing to participate and join in the vile acts of your classmates. You don't know how sick I felt in my heart after reading what you wrote. Punching someone in the head while having sex with them is full blown sexual abuse. Not only that, it is one of the greatest acts of disrespect a male could demonstrate to a female -- to a fellow human being, period. It is disrespectful to everything that sex and love is. That type of behaviour is animalistic and subhuman. It is probably best left unshared what I believe should be done to a creature who would behave in that manner. I will say this, your classmates weren't young men, they weren't even boys. They chose to be something less than wild, rabid beasts. It is beyond appalling that this is what passes for appropriate behaviour and proper treatment of our companion gender amongst many of the young males in our modern culture.
  18. What Counts?

    I think hugging, holding hands, and cuddling are okay before marriage. I think light kissing on the lips, head, forehead, and cheeks is okay, particularly if the couple is engaged. I don't believe in hands on the rear, or on the woman's bosom, or any touching of the groin area outside of marriage. I think that light touching, kissing, and holding to show warmth and affection and to comfort the person is okay but, that those same acts, when sensually motivated, should be saved for marriage. When it comes to movies I do indeed classify nude and sex secenes as full blown pornography. Anytime anyone shares their nakedness with the public for money, I consider it part of a sex industry. Anytime anyone exposes themselves and any part of the motivation for it is the public's enjoyment or entertainment then, it's pornography. let's be honest. The only reason nudity and sex are depicted is because most people in our culture want to see it and, when it's depicted, it makes more money. Realistically, using the toilet is far more essential to daily life than sex yet, most TV show and movie makers choose not to depict their characters in the private act of getting rid of breakfast. They instead leave that matter up to the assumption and imagination of the audiance. I've heard the defense that it is just simulated sex only done in front of limited crew for the purpose of telling the story. I disagree. Anytime you have two naked people rubbing, touching, tasting, caressing, and partaking of one another's naked bodies; that is a sexual act. Anytime they do it in front of others or in public, it's pornography. I've never seen a movie or TV show that absolutely required those types of scenes to tell the story. If someone has any value at all as a storyteller they can weave sex into the story without actually depicting it. These sex acts aren't done merely in front of limited crew. Countless millions of people end up watching those actors do it. They are observed over and over -- more times than it's possible to count -- performing those sex acts on one another. If they had done it in the middle of Yankee Stadium with every seat packed it would be less public than if they did it in a movie for the whole world and future generations to see. That's not even the worst of it on a personal level for most of these actors and actresses. Most of them have spouses or, boyfreinds and girlfreinds at the time they do these pornographic scenes. Would you be okay with your spouse, boyfreind, or girlfreind making out with a coworker in public while you watched? Would you be okay with them having sex in public with a coworker? Would you be okay with a parent, a sibling, or your son or daughter doing those things in public? Would it be okay to look into a stranger's window and watch them have sex? Is it really any different looking into the TV screen watching the same thing? I remember being nineteen the first time I ever saw the movie Braveheart. My family had seen the previews and had been wanting to see the movie. So, when it was released on VHS, my grandpa rented it and the whole family crowded into my grandparents living room to watch. Everyone was so eager to see this hardcore medieval action movie that none of us thought to check the rating or read up on the content. Well, there was a porn scene not too far into the show. I was sitting right next to my grandmother, getting into the storyline when, suddenly a naked Mel Gibson is slobbering all over the naked body of a young woman half his age. I wanted to sink down out of my chair and slide under a rock. Needless to say, my grandma was very displeased with what was on the TV screen and, rightly so. Ever since then, that experience has been my measuring stick for how decent and clean a movie is. Would I feel comfortable watching a particular movie while sitting next to my grandmother with her old-time values and sensibilities?
  19. Who here aspires to marry a wealthy man?

    The OP hasn't been on here in nearly a year but, I will respond to what she wrote anyway. I understand the desire to avoid poverty. I know from experience that it is unpleasant. I even get wanting to have nice things but, elevating all of that above true love -- replacing love with materialism -- leads to a hollow, empty end. I've seen it too many times to believe otherwise. I think it's entirely the wrong reason and mindset for marriage and it's not a path I would choose or recommend. That being said, you want what you want and you are honest about it. If you were honest with whomever you were in a relationship with, he was aware of what he was getting into and, he was fine with it, it's better than if you fooled the guy into believing you married him because you truly loved him. This being the path you want to take in life, you had better be drop-dead gorgeous, because usually that's the only kind of woman who can get away with marrying for money. That's pretty much the way materialism works. To be blunt and, perhaps crude about it, if you want the dude to be well off, he's likely going to want you to look like a super model and be built like an adult film actress. If you are going to want him for his money, and he is okay with that, he is most likely going to want you for your looks and your sexuality, and will expect you to be okay with that. If you are prepared to leave him as soon as his money runs out then you should also be prepared for him to leave you the moment your looks begin to fade. By the time your are 35-40 years old you better have found yourself a world class plastic surgeon or have convinced your husband to shred the prenuptual contract. That's simply the way relationships founded in materialism work. Something else to consider is that guys who do operate on the principles of materialism are most likely not going to put up with waiting until marriage to have sex. Materialism is a methodology based in selfishness and that just isn't a trait that fosters celibacy of any kind. A female marrying a guy because of how much money he has is the equivalent to a male marrying a woman for her looks, bust size, and how willing she is to "put out." Just as most women take insult at a man who rates and views them this way, so do most men take insult with the money thing. If your primary reason for marrying someone is anything other than because of who they are as a person then, you are asking for marital problems.
  20. Keep Her Guessing

    I'm not one of the ladies but, I will respond to this anyway because I am a man and, the behavior you describe is not the behavior of a man. It is the behavior of a weasel. Why would somebody do that? The only reasons for a male to do something like that is because they are either a major game-playing jerk, they are trying to connive their way into a woman's life and/or pants, or they simply aren't man enough to own up to their past and who they are. Most sensible women would dump a guy who played monkey games like that. Real people just don't have time for that type of nonsense. Life is way too short to squander any of it on stupidity like that. I don't' understand the point of this thread. Do you know somebody who does that? Are you testing the waters? What? "Keep her guessing" indeed. The title of this thread should have been: How a male can act like the rear end of a donkey and waste a woman's time by showing her just how little he thinks of her. I hate to be mean but, the unmanly behavior and ungentlemanly mindset of so many modern males disgusts me and is simply unacceptable.
  21. Children: A deal breaker?

    It would take something far more significant than an inability to become pregnant to keep me from marrying the love of my life. In fact it doesn't even make the list of things that I consider. Children should be a blessing that springs forth from marital love and intimacy, not the reason for trying to have said love and intimacy. Having children is not the reason I want a wife. As wonderful as having children and bringing life into this world is, my desire for a wife runs far deeper and richer than that -- is much more intricate and beautiful.
  22. 90, 60, 90 = perfection?

    After converting to inches and checking with a tape measure my jaw dropped. A twenty three and a half inch waist?! Do adults even come in that size? I don't know that I've ever come across a full grown woman in real life with a waist that tiny. I think I was around ten or twelve years old the last time my own waist was that small. Maybe the "super-sized America" effect is more prevalent where I live or the part of my brain that attempts to estimate a woman's waist size needs to be recalibrated but, there's no way that could be a realistic expectation. I'm sure there are women with waists that small but, looking at the tape measure, it just doesn't seem real. As a point of reference, my biceps are twenty inches. She would be almost as skinny as my arm! If those are the sizes that the media is touting they are insane. I don't even think the bone structure and internal organ arrangement of most women would allow for a waist that small. I've seen some wonderfully toned and sculpted women -- women in amazing shape -- and their waistlines didn't come close to being that size. My amazement aside, I have found women of almost every body type physically appealing -- very overweight, very thin, and pretty much every size and shape in between. I think I am inclined to agree with Stacie's post above -- It's how "womanly" a woman is with what she has been given that makes the difference in the end.
  23. "Bitch" as a term of endearment

    @HopefulPoet I agree with your view of love. That is why I "liked" your post. In fact, I posted my own similar view on this site before: When your wife is at her lowest possible point it is your job to love her and not leave her, no matter what. Beyond that, when she is at her ugliest, when she strikes and lashes out at you, when she hurts you it is your duty to, not just love her but, to remain in love with her and continue to cherish and treasure her. It is your duty to continue to see her beauty and remind her of it, even when she is at her worst. That is husbandly love. Unfortunately, whether it was her intent or not, Marilyn Monroe's quote makes her come across as arrogant and convinced that she is entitled to that type of love. When the attitude of the recipient of that love changes from humility and gratitude to self importance and entitlement, it completely alters the landscape of the relationship. When the recipient views the love given as something that is owed rather than one of the greatest gifts and sacrifices they could possibly receive, it cheapens and dishonors that gift and grievously insults the person giving it. I imagine God would quickly get a bellyful of we Christians if we told him in our prayers and stated in church that if he can't love us when we are sinning like berserk heathens, then he certainly doesn't deserve our love and worship every Sunday when we choose to take a short break from sinning. In fact, I'd wager He would send some "humbling life circumstances" our way in an attempt to improve our poor attitudes. When love is viewed as something that is deserved rather than a gift that is given, it cheapens it. Granted, Marilyn Monroe's statement is absolutely true but, it is devalued by the less than humble manner in which she presented that truth. A less offensive and perhaps more accurate way of making her point might have been to say, "If you handle me when I am at my worst then you deserve me when I am at my best." It removes the "female canine" attitude, discussed earlier in this thread, from her statement and replaces it with something far more civil and agreeable -- something far more palpable to, not only we men but, to any reasonable civilized individual. I think it is this particular attitude that the guys who have posted in this thread have a problem with. Most men find the aggressive, arrogant, retaliatory attitude that is present in many women today to be a total turn off. It is an insult and disrespect to us as men and it generally replaces and eradicates the femininity and lady-like behavior that we find so attractive and appealing in women. Men who choose to behave as gentlemen are looking for the companionship of ladies, not the company of female canines. A woman who desires the company or attention of we gentlemen should think very carefully before she takes up that whole rabid feminist "female canine" way of life. It generally doesn't fly with real men or, real women for that matter.
  24. "Bitch" as a term of endearment

    I'm not one of the gals on here but, I feel the need to agree with you, Vince. I find it crude, disgusting, unladylike, and unfeminine. The first thing that comes to my mind when I hear a female brand herself with this term is that her behavior and attitude is likely closer to that of some emotionally volatile, haughty, disrespectful animal rather than a rational, civilized human being. It is a total turn-off for me. I would not even be inclined to remain in the vicinity of such a person, let alone consider them for any kind of relationship -- romantic or otherwise. Someone who labels herself with this term isn't even on the same sphere of thought as me. My first instinct would be to have no respect for such an individual. She really couldn't expect me to have any when she has chosen to carry such vile disrespect for herself and then be proud of it. The highest regard I could muster for her would be pity and perhaps grieve the casting aside of her potential glory as a woman. There is a world of difference between my treatment of a mere female canine and a full blown woman. One gets a pat on the head, fresh water in it's bowl, and a few Scooby snacks -- if it's well behaved. The other gets my utter respect and admiration and is treated like the being of divine beauty and glory that she is. I suppose that would have little value, though, to someone who has chosen to classify herself as an animal.
  25. Find or make a place in your conversation to tactfully broach the subject. You might begin by saying something like, "You've been upfront with me about your past relationships and I really appreciate that. I would like to give you a little bit of insight as to where I am coming from." Be honest and lay it out for him in a non-judgmental way. If he's any kind of man worth pursuing he will appreciate you being honest and forthright. If he doesn't then he's probably not someone you want to have a relationship with anyway. If I, as someone who is waiting, went on a date with a woman who was a non-waiter and she was upfront about it, even on the first date, I would have total respect for her and would greatly appreciate the heads up. If she suddenly laid it on me a dozen or so dates in -- or however many dates non-waiters have before doing the deed -- that she was ready to start having sex, my reaction would probably be markedly less palpable than if I'd had some forewarning and time to think about things.