The subject of Sex (from a guy POV)

[TiredMan]

Believing in an eye for an eye, and not agreeing with domestic violence are two different things. I would never hit my partner unless they hit me. And I mean never. In fact, I would not hit anyone who doesn't hit me first. But if they do, will they did it and I will retaliate.

 

I blame women who continue to act like the behaviors I listed are ok and are fine with it. There are women out there who complain that their husbands don't do all the things they used to do when they dated now that they are married. In fact, I read an article today where a woman said "marriage is just dating with rings." Oh cmon!

 

No i'm not basing that fact on my personal experience. I'm basing it on everything. I quoted a case where a man (MLB pitcher) reported his wife abusing him and he became a laughingstock for it.

 

Make sense now? OK? Good!

[Scout]

Make sense now? OK? Good!

 

To me, no...it doesn't make sense. Domestic violence is domestic violence. If someone hits their partner and their partner hits them back, violence has occurred by both. Should the one who hit first get the brunt of the blame? Yes. But would the violence that occurred be twice as less if the second person hadn't struck back? Yes. So, if you're against anything, why would you want to create more of it?

[Scout]

Well said Freedom. But I think people don't want to hear that.

 

Maybe, maybe not. But you're not exactly trying to reach middle ground with many folks on here. You don't seem to want to count what their opinions mean, either.

[dogheadma]

 

Make sense now? OK? Good!

 

No, it dosen't, but that's ok. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. Thanks for sharing. I'm out like shout.

[TiredMan]

To me, no...it doesn't make sense. Domestic violence is domestic violence. If someone hits their partner and their partner hits them back, violence has occurred by both. Should the one who hit first get the brunt of the blame? Yes. But would the violence that occurred be twice as less if the second person hadn't struck back? Yes. So, if you're against anything, why would you want to create more of it?

 

Well. Because no violence would occur with me at all unless it is created on their end. I don't deserve to be hit for anything I say or do (other than physically attacking them of course). So if they decide they are going to hit me, then, IMO, I can hit back and I do/will.

[CarnelianButterfly]

Well. Because no violence would occur with me at all unless it is created on their end. I don't deserve to be hit for anything I say or do (other than physically attacking them of course). So if they decide they are going to hit me, then, IMO, I can hit back and I do/will.

 

Wouldn't it be better to try to restrain the person and call the police.

 

I had a friend that had a abusive GF, he had been in the Marines and could easily defend himself. His girlfriend got drunk and started hitting and kicking and threw beer bottles at him. He never hit her, he held her wrists and pushed her into the bathroom and called the cops.

 

How would hitting someone help the situation? It will only escalate the violence and make every thing worse.

[TiredMan]

Maybe, maybe not. But you're not exactly trying to reach middle ground with many folks on here. You don't seem to want to count what their opinions mean, either.

 

Oh I'm sure of it. I was sure of it when I read certain replies and the way that one guy was attacked and compared to a rapist. But it's not my job to "reach middle ground".

 

And I don't have to reply as much as I have. I think I have replied to almost every post arguing with me, which is more than others have. Thanks.

[TiredMan]

Wouldn't it be better to try to restrain the person and call the police.

 

I had a friend that had a abusive GF, he had been in the Marines and could easily defend himself. His girlfriend got drunk and started hitting and kicking and threw beer bottles at him. He never hit her, he held her wrists and pushed her into the bathroom and called the cops.

 

How would hitting someone help the situation? It will only escalate the violence and make every thing worse.

 

Because I believe if attacked, you have every right to defend yourself, if possible.

[holyohio]

Wouldn't it be better to try to restrain the person and call the police.

 

I had a friend that had a abusive GF, he had been in the Marines and could easily defend himself. His girlfriend got drunk and started hitting and kicking and threw beer bottles at him. He never hit her, he held her wrists and pushed her into the bathroom and called the cops.

 

How would hitting someone help the situation? It will only escalate the violence and make every thing worse.

 

I think he's going on the notion that it's generally unwise to inflict physical harm to another person without at least considering paying the consequences (Treat others as you would like to be treated kind of thing)

 

In the male/female model, society has taught women that there are no such consequences so that if they, in a fit of rage or emotion or whatever, hit a man, they will not be harmed and if they are, they can reframe it such that the man is a terrible excuse of a human being and they are simply the victim (for whatever reason).

 

Thus, it is okay for women to hit men, but not okay for men to reciprocate if provoked.

[CarnelianButterfly]

Never OK for any one to hit any one else. It by no means is ever acceptable to resort to violence, no matter which sex does what or who does it first.

 

Eye for an eye would leave the whole world blind.

[melrich]

Because I believe if attacked, you have every right to defend yourself, if possible.

 

Someone hits you in the testicles and you get up and punch them is not defending yourself, it is retaliating.

 

Defending yourself would be trying to stop them hitting you in the first place which I agree you have every right to do.

[TiredMan]

I think he's going on the notion that it's generally unwise to inflict physical harm to another person without at least considering paying the consequences (Treat others as you would like to be treated kind of thing)

 

In the male/female model, society has taught women that there are no such consequences so that if they, in a fit of rage or emotion or whatever, hit a man, they will not be harmed and if they are, they can reframe it such that the man is a terrible excuse of a human being and they are simply the victim (for whatever reason).

 

Thus, it is okay for women to hit men, but not okay for men to reciprocate if provoked.

 

Very well said and 100 percent accurate! I'm sure it won't go noticed though.

 

Some will disagree saying it's never ok but they are just facing reality. In out society, men hitting women versus women hitting men is just looked at differently. It just is and there is no way to say it is not. And its utter nonsense.

[TiredMan]

Someone hits you in the testicles and you get up and punch them is not defending yourself, it is retaliating.

 

Defending yourself would be trying to stop them hitting you in the first place which I agree you have every right to do.

 

I didn't expect to get hit. I didn't physically attack her so I did NOT expect to get hit so how can I defend it? I was completely taken aback by it. Defending yourself also means fighting back, not just blocking. EVen by law standards you can hit back within reason. If someone is coming at me with a knife, defending myself doesn't just mean evading it. If I have a licensed gun, I have the right to shoot them to stop them for attacking or attacking me even more than they have. Once they are stopped, I can't obviously keep on doing it.

[TiredMan]

Well, it's one of the signs almost any article about infidelity will say to look out for...when your partner suddenly doesn't want sex that much anymore. Why do you have to turn that into a gender issue, too?

 

There is yet another post on here where a female is complaining because she seems to initiate the sex more often. They love each other but she wants more sex and since he hasn't gone along, "something is wrong". Unreal!

[Scout]

What post are you referring to?

[TiredMan]

The new relationship sex one.

[CarnelianButterfly]

And you've never complained about not getting enough sex?

[TiredMan]

And you've never complained about not getting enough sex?

 

if it's someone I am in a relationship with, I don't care about that aspect as much as the "connection".

 

In flings and just "seein" each other, it mattered more because I didn't care a bit about the person.

[CarnelianButterfly]

If you'd actually read the post it doesn't sound like a fling. The guy's not putting out enough for her sex drive. Is it a problem if women express their displeasure in the fact they aren't satisfied sexually or is it that women don't keep quiet and bow down to the wishes of every man?

[TiredMan]

If you'd actually read the post it doesn't sound like a fling. The guy's not putting out enough for her sex drive. Is it a problem if women express their displeasure in the fact they aren't satisfied sexually or is it that women don't keep quiet and bow down to the wishes of every man?

 

If you had read MY response to you, you would see I never said what she has is a fling. You asked me about ME.

 

And I said, the only time I care about that is if it IS a fling. And if the fling wasn't into as much sex as me, then I would just go elsewhere as it is only a fling.

 

If I'm in a relationship, the sex stuff matter much less to me than the connection to the person.

[Scout]

Ok, I found the thread. TiredMan, in all fairness you should note that male posters are also suggesting there's something wrong with the guy's sex drive (one actually suggests he gets testosterone shots

 

You know, you may never admit this, but A LOT of guys perpetuate the stereotype that men are non-stop sex machines. I've seen posts on here from guys saying, "all we think about is sex" and I've heard guys say it in real life.

 

So, that is at least one contributing factor to why women think there must be something "wrong" if a guy doesn't want sex as much as the stereotype indicates.

[TiredMan]

Wow I had lost this post.

 

Anyway, the guys who do say that are only doing so for the reasons I said. It's "expected" for the guy to be what you described. If a woman says "no" the guy is supposed to accept it. A man says "no" and there is something wrong.

 

Back to the hitting thing. Anyone who disagrees with what I said is just plain wrong. Im sorry but they are. In our society, a woman hitting a man is either seen as "not good" or "accepted" and once in a long while, abuse. A man hitting a woman is ALWAYS seen as abuse. There are many many many people who believe that even if a woman hits you, you should not hit her.