Retroactive Infidelity.

[kadvati79]

Adultfriendfinder is sex hookups. Lavalife has three sections: dating, relationship and intimate section. Intimate section is for hookups. Relationship is for stuff like I'm posting here, and if you think this thread is harsh, that profile is ten times worst. The opening line to it is "what did YOU do with your most important gift?" and the rest of the profile goes deep into this. No smiles or response on it so far. Oh well.

Theres many diverse people out there with lots of beliefs that can seem a little weird or hard to swallow to others. But I'm sure theres girls out there who view the world as you do. Althought I suspect theres probably more that would want to break your nose with their handbags.

 

At the end of the day, I guess anne24's statements are right... if thats what works for you, then so be it.

[kadvati79]

Divorce doesn't exist in my mind. Why? Because in a marriage cerimony it's said "what God has put together let no man divide".

 

If a marriage ends in divorce, then God did not put together these people and it was destined to fail, how can God put together something and it falls apart, whatever God does is perfect and enduring.

 

Okay, you believe that. But that doesn't make it true, no matter how strong you believe it. Even if I firmly believe you are wrong, that doesn't mean that you are actually wrong.

 

Being a good human being means being tolerant and respectful of other peoples views, even where they differ with your own. I'd be careful to prefix your views with "I believe..." otherwise people will just think you're a bit.... errrm.... extreme.

[Luke Skywalker]

I am intrigued by this Luke. Do you define 'man' as someone who deflowers his woman? Is this your own self-definition?

 

No. I'm not defining man on this thread. I'm defining man in terms of a traditional value or place in a relationship. The man is supposed to lead the relationship and be an authority - that cant happen if the woman has more experience.

[Ellie2006]

The man is supposed to lead the relationship and be an authority - that cant happen if the woman has more experience.

 

It's not about upperhand, it's about proper balance.

 

Aren't you contradicting yourself here? Which is it? Is it about "proper balance" or a man having more "authority"?

[Luke Skywalker]

Aren't you contradicting yourself here? Which is it? Is it about "proper balance" or a man having more "authority"?

 

No, it is about proper balance for the man to have more authority, or what do you have? Then you are nice guy and friendzoned? Please.

[Luke Skywalker]

So you ask what betrays a lack of respect for women in the comments you made?

 

 

No, I brought up a thread - and unfortunately until people on here READ THAT THREAD, they are not giving me a fair hearing on here.

 

Did you look at the link?

[annie24]

anne24, you are my new personal hero this week... hilarious! and so true I must remember that line...

 

awww thanks for the compliment

[Ellie2006]

No, it is about proper balance for the man to have more authority, or what do you have? Then you are nice guy and friendzoned? Please.

 

Balance roughly means "equal distribution" -- if one has "more" than the other, how is this balance?

[caro33]

No. I'm not defining man on this thread. I'm defining man in terms of a traditional value or place in a relationship. The man is supposed to lead the relationship and be an authority - that cant happen if the woman has more experience.

 

But the woman can never experience sex from a man's perspective anyway. I would hazard a guess that the issues that surround first-time sex would be quite different between the genders. I also wonder if most of the television we watch and books/magazines we read don't make all of us authorities on sex, regardless of our actual experience. So if it's her noting poor performance that you are concerned about, I think you can assume she probably knows what to expect in a general sense, whether or not she is a virgin.

 

The reading/TV point aside, you can still want to be an authority on sex compared to the woman, but I question what authority you have if you are a virgin yourself, irrespective of what she has done.

 

Or are we talking a moral authority, in which case you can have that as a virgin even if, and perhaps particularly so in your world, the woman is not a virgin.

 

How does the man lead the relationship? When the woman has babies and runs the household (which I assume is part of your belief set, the babies and mother at home, please correct me if I am wrong), is she being 'led' by the man?

 

Anyway, no doubt the thread has moved on as I type this. I am particularly interested to hear your response to Ellie's comments.

[kadvati79]

No, I brought up a thread - and unfortunately until people on here READ THAT THREAD, they are not giving me a fair hearing on here.

 

Did you look at the link?

 

I don't think it would be very fair for people to harshly criticise you for your beliefs. And knowing anne24, I am sure she wasn't. I think people are just, in the spirit of the thread, trying to give you a perspective that might challenge a few of the views that you've expressed that might get in the way of you having a more "modern" relationship based on partnership and equal decision making, rather than submission.

[Luke Skywalker]

Sigh.

 

 

[caro33]

Sigh.

 

]

 

I have to say I scanned this, but at three pages I wasn't sure what I was looking for. I had assumed you were directing us to your own points but then saw you had deleted them. Is your point that those posters were disrespectful to women? and you are not in comparison?

[Ellie2006]

No, I brought up a thread - and unfortunately until people on here READ THAT THREAD, they are not giving me a fair hearing on here.

 

Did you look at the link?

 

What exactly about the thread did you want me to take note of?

 

The fact that the original poster of that thread states he felt "angry, hurt, and vengeful" that his gf was not a virgin that he was contemplating exploiting an innocent bystander, who means "nothing to him" to "lose" his virginity?

 

Or the fact that he contemplated cheating on his gf to "get back at the female sex in general"?

[Luke Skywalker]

I have to say I scanned this, but at three pages I wasn't sure what I was looking for. I had assumed you were directing us to your own points but then saw you had deleted them. Is your point that those posters were disrespectful to women? and you are not in comparison?

 

No, no, no. I'm saying when a woman behaves like that, that causes people to disrespect women, like in that thread. So, this thread sort of extrapolates on that idea.

 

I also want the readers to take note of the 24 y/o girl poster who said that she's a virgin and would not feel right if her man is a not a virgin and only wants to date a virgin.

 

It leads me to the assumption that except for quietgirl, most women on this thread are non-virgins, but it's interesting, when you read a post from a virgin girl, then it matters that the guy is a virgin too, so that has nothing to do with disrespect of women.

[Luke Skywalker]

What exactly about the thread did you want me to take note of?

 

The fact that the original poster of that thread states he felt "angry, hurt, and vengeful" that his gf was not a virgin that he was contemplating exploiting an innocent bystander, who means "nothing to him" to "lose" his virginity?

 

His gf was a virgin, but she cheated on him and lost her virginity to another guy. That is the worst possible form of cheating. I use this thread as an illustration.

 

Or the fact that he contemplated cheating on his gf to "get back at the female sex in general"?

 

Again, you are taking selective information. The relationship fell apart after she cheated on him, now he wants to lose his virginity to ANYONE because he doesn't give a crap about his future gf, spouce or whatever from the hurt and betrayal he experienced from his gf that acted like a wh0re.

 

Well, I guess we are both focusing on different aspects of the same thread.

[caro33]

No, no, no. I'm saying when a woman behaves like that, that causes people to disrespect women, like in that thread. So, this thread sort of extrapolates on that idea.

 

I also want the readers to take note of the 24 y/o girl poster who said that she's a virgin and would not feel right if her man is a not a virgin and only wants to date a virgin.

 

It leads me to the assumption that except for quietgirl, most women on this thread are non-virgins, but it's interesting, when you read a post from a virgin girl, then it matters that the guy is a virgin too, so that has nothing to do with disrespect of women.

 

I think that what is not getting through here is that the response you are receiving, at least from me, is not about virgins vs non-virgins, or any religious issues, but about the provocative language you use. The statements you have made, which Ellie has repeated, as have I, have come accross as hugely disrespectful and I think cannot go unquestioned.

 

By the way, I have noted you have had similar responses to some of your other postings in the past, and as recently as yesterday. ( )

 

Perhaps you make these comments for effect, I am not sure. However, as long as you make them, you will have women (and men) reacting and calling you to account.

[Luke Skywalker]

Perhaps you make these comments for effect, I am not sure. However, as long as you make them, you will have women (and men) reacting and calling you to account.

 

Only nonvirgin people are calling me into account, but virgin people like quietgirl are supporting me.

[caro33]

Only nonvirgin people are calling me into account, but virgin people like quietgirl are supporting me.

 

I think this is a spurious claim. The absense of self-proclaimed virgins taking you to task on your comments about women does not mean that they actively support these comments.

 

Note again, I am not talking about your position on virginity, I am talking about the statements you make around women's value as defined by them not being penetrated by (other) men, by your statements about women being submissive and 'led' by men, by your implications in your other thread that women are unintelligent, yet devious enough to lead men astray, and your recent comments along the lines of how one girl cheating somehow justifies a disrespect for women in general.

 

If you are so clear and comfortable with your perspective I would like to see you respond directly to the questions that have been asked of you, and most pertinently, the questions Ellie asked of you a while ago.

[Luke Skywalker]

I think this is a spurious claim. The absense of self-proclaimed virgins taking you to task on your comments about women does not mean that they actively support these comments.

 

Note again, I am not talking about your position on virginity, I am talking about the statements you make around women's value as defined by them not being penetrated by (other) men, by your statements about women being submissive and 'led' by men, by your implications in your other thread that women are unintelligent, yet devious enough to lead men astray, and your recent comments along the lines of how one girl cheating somehow justifies a disrespect for women in general.

 

Well, you are entitled to your opinion, and I'm entitled to mine. My opinion comes from the Bible, and God knows best about everything.

 

- In the OT a virgin woman is more value than a non-virigin woman as the dowery is more expensive in the former compared to the latter case.

 

- NT talks about husbands as being the spiritual head of home as Christ is spiritual head of church.

 

- Fall of humanity rooted in Adam and Eve story, and that line of through is followed in Pauline.

 

 

 

If you are so clear and comfortable with your perspective I would like to see you respond directly to the questions that have been asked of you, and most pertinently, the questions Ellie asked of you a while ago.

 

Sure, I'll answer them tomorrow, but I have to go to bed now.

[kadvati79]

Perhaps this threads at the risk of descending into a flame war. Clearly Luke Skywalker has some strong views on the topic, we've all heard them, and there's been some good points made about the opposing views. Nobody is really going to "change" their opinions so we probably need to be careful how much further the discussion goes...?

 

I mean, I thought this discussion wasn't really about religion? I mean, we're talking apples and bananas if some of the topic members have strong religious beliefs they feel are factual, and others don't.

[caro33]

Perhaps this threads at the risk of descending into a flame war. Clearly Luke Skywalker has some strong views on the topic, we've all heard them, and there's been some good points made about the opposing views. Nobody is really going to "change" their opinions so we probably need to be careful how much further the discussion goes...?

 

I mean, I thought this discussion wasn't really about religion? I mean, we're talking apples and bananas if some of the topic members have strong religious beliefs they feel are factual, and others don't.

 

 

I agree icemotoboy, in the sense that people's minds are not going to change, particularly when religion enters the picture. I also am making every effort for this not to turn into flaming. However, when someone comes on a board like ENA and starts making wholesale assertions about women it would seem reasonable to have them be responsible and accountable for their actions.

 

I think this has been an interesting debate so far, and am quietly hoping that someone better educated in the Bible than me (Juliana?) can come back here, to be honest.

 

At the least, I think that these discussions might help the OP understand why he might be getting the reactions he does. Given he said he would respond to Ellie tomorrow, I am also keen to see what he says. This is an educational experience for me also.

[quietgrl]

Hi quietgrl

 

You are a key person to ask then - what do you think about your virginity as the greatest gift you can offer a man? I am not saying that it is not tremendously meaningful and precious, or that your position is in any way unrealistic, but I wonder if we look at that statement, do you feel it is your greatest attribute?

 

Further, what about the issue of being submissive? Would you see yourself as "submitting" to your husband when the time came?

 

 

Yes, i think anything i give to a man is a gift(body,mind,love and soul) because I'm nothing without my mind,body and soul.

[Batya33]

Yes, i think anything i give to a man is a gift(body,mind,love and soul) because I'm nothing without my mind,body and soul.

 

Anything? So, if you hugged a male friend that would be the same result? Where in the marriage vows does it say anything about giving a man your mind, body and soul (as opposed to being in a partnership and joining with your husband in all meaningful respects).

 

And, I assume you see it as a reciprocal gift - and with the expectation that the man gives of his mind, body and soul, yes?

[Juliana]

You want me to stop "throwing" Blble versus, I can do that, but then you'll just accuse me of being unbiblical. My main purpose in answering your question was to demonstrate that what you are proposing as a Christian point of view isn't.

 

So, to make a long story short, the problem with your concept is that you believe that the flesh is more important than the spirit. You want a virgin wife because you believe that this has something to do with her spiritual qualities. Jesus was all about the spirit. The physical simply doesn't matter. By their fruits ye shall know them, yes, and the fruit of the Pharisees was hypocrisy, attention to the outward show of piety and not the inward rebirth, and judgmental attitudes.

 

It is not judging the sky to point to it and call it blue; and I am not judging you when I say, your attitudes are not Christian. I am merely stating a fact.

 

"Whatever demons are inside a person are transfered by sexual intercourse, and is a by-product of defilement."

 

Land o' goshen. Well, there ya go. (oh, do I even want to go there....sigh). So I assume you think Christians can have demons? People who are born again can be demon-infested?

 

It's interesting to me that everyone wants to keep discussing this with you, because you are obviously not going to bend or be moved on this issue. The Pharisees likewise were very stiff-necked; don't think it's a virtue that you are demonstrating here. I know why I have to answer you; I wonder why the others do.

 

Batya, just for discussion:

 

"In the OT a virgin woman is more value than a non-virigin woman as the dowery is more expensive in the former compared to the latter case."

 

Life expectancy was not long in those days. A virgin was typically 14-15 years old. The dowry was considered part compensation for the years of labour that her family would be deprived of through her marriage; rather than a reflection just of the worth of her virginity. It was part, but not all, of the valuation of the dowry.

 

"NT talks about husbands as being the spiritual head of home as Christ is spiritual head of church."

 

God is Lord over all; the woman's submission to the husband is symbolic of her true submission, which is to God. If her husband ordered her to steal something, or kill someone -- to sin, in other words -- her submission would not require that, and her true submission, to God, would not allow it. Her submission is to her husband so long as his is to God; both are under Christ.

 

The submission that Luke is looking for is not actually to him; it's to God. This is why I can be completely submissive to my husband, and a "raging feminist" at the same time.

 

I'm not enjoying this thread, because the actual intent is pointless. Luke obviously comes from a perverted understanding, and he isn't going to change his mind. He wants to believe what he believes, and will actually use any arguments as justification to maintain his position (because in his mind, he is being attacked and misunderstood), rather than as suggestions or information to change his opinion. He wants to make a loud noise about his beliefs. Which means I have to come out and refute what disagrees with the New Testament; I am required to do this. I can't have evil spoken of the Lord, and if I don't answer, someone might think this is what Christianity teaches.

 

Actually, to be really biblical about this, I could just go to Hosea. It's all about an OT prophet who married a * * * * * and adulteress. This was to symbolize the marriage of God to Israel. Israel had prostituted itself to foreign gods. "For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice, and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings. But they like men have transgressed the covenant...I have seen a horrible thing in the house of Israel: There is the whoredom of Ephraim, Israel is defiled." Hosea 6:6-7,10

 

People don't even understand the Bible anymore, so they do all kinds of foolish things. The flesh doesn't matter; it is the spirit that is clean or unclean. All that is born again in Christ is clean. What Christ forgives, a man cannot judge.

 

It's sad but interesting to wonder if someone with Luke's attitudes would have been able to associate with the people in the early Church; they were all slaves, prostitutes -- nobodies, really. God didn't care who came to him, rich or poor. But Luke does. And that's sad.

[Batya33]

Sorry - I had meant to delete that message and now did it right, oops. I deleted it for the reasons you stated in your post, that it did not make sense to argue the point.