Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I know a few LGBT's in my Meetup groups. They're single, so I haven't seen their relationships unfold. But I can't imagine an LGBT relationship being as filled with fighting and drama as most straight relationships.
100% of women and 20% of men (the naturally attractive ones) will continue to enjoy the spontaneity as always. It's only the other 80% of men who will lose it. Because if a woman feels attraction to a man, the consent is practically automatic, unless his timing is way off. It's only the unattractive men who have to ask permission every step of the way.
Yes.
I thought it was only the top 5% of men that get to enjoy all the fun with 95% of the men missing out.
What is lame is that some women have the idea that a lady can withdrawal consent after the fact. By this, I mean after a consensual sexual epi., like maybe a few hours later, she withdraws consent. Sorry SJW feminists, but it doesn't work like that.
No, that is not EVER what the "reversible" part of consent was meant to imply. Never, not ever, not in any argument by any feminist on earth ever at all. But hey nice try of crying foul play, where there is none.
The anger is at the NC law where if a woman consents and permits a man to begin, he then has a legal right to finish. Which means that if he's the kind of guy who literally takes HOURS to finish, and she begins to experience severe pain and starts screaming, he can cover her mouth and keep going. It's perfectly OK for the men of NC, if the experience they are giving their women in bed, is essentially torture instead of pleasure.
The "reversible" thing is, if we are doing something and one of us says "Actually, stop. I don't want to do this now." then you stop. It does not mean that consent given prior to that is invalidated.
It never meant that.
Except in the minds of men desperate to grab some victimhood for themselves, because they really can't handle when literally every single thing isn't all about them.
I had a young man in high school that I'd consented to have sex with, sink his teeth, hard, into the flesh of my face. I screamed and pushed him off and, in tears from the pain, kicked him out of my house. By the NC law, I violated his legal right to "finish" what he'd started there. I would like to hope that this sort of thing is not what the men of this thread support, but hey. Never know with the kind of stuff we see around here.
EDIT: Oh and I guarantee that you, and most guys, would fully understand what "reversible" means if the shoe is on the other foot. Plenty of guys enjoy backdoor play, where a female partner is doing a particular kind of stimulation to them. Some absolutely are not into that. Suppose some man told his girlfriend he wanted to try, and there she is, because hey she's a good sport, all lubed up and going for it, and suddenly he's just really not comfortable with things and says, "Actually you know what...I would really rather not do this."
Consent is reversible, means that she has to stop. If you want to argue that once given, no take-backsies, then she doesn't have to stop, and ya better hope he isn't tied to the bed, because she might have some twisted desire to see what she can do to him and she can keep right on until SHE is satisfied. That would not be cool, would it? I don't think it would.
The entire concept is not a smokescreen for "buyer's remorse"--I promise.
People wonder why life like AI robots for sex and other things are becoming so popular. I personally don't want to deal with snowflakes, sjws and people in general who need a "safe space". Give me a hot looking, sexy AI robot that can clean, cook and meet any of my sexual desires and needs any day over dealing with idiots like the person who posted that crap on FB.
lol then women going on dates and getting food/entertainment and then not putting out is now considered fraud. How stupid can this world get. Are we almost to the point where we are going to require some responsibility for themselves?
lol then women going on dates and getting food/entertainment and then not putting out is now considered fraud. How stupid can this world get. Are we almost to the point where we are going to require some responsibility for themselves?
Not just fraud, it should be considered mental assault and treated as a crime. Because it can really cause a depression for a young, inexperienced men. I am speaking from experience because I met a few women like this as I started dating. It took me a while to have a strategy against "dinner whores"...
Not just fraud, it should be considered mental assault and treated as a crime. Because it can really cause a depression for a young, inexperienced men. I am speaking from experience because I met a few women like this as I started dating. It took me a while to have a strategy against "dinner whores"...
I am speaking from experience because I met a few women like this as I started dating. It took me a while to have a strategy against "dinner whores"...
In this day and age, any man who takes a woman on a dinner date is a chump and deserves what he gets. The information on how women's attraction mindset works is out there, openly accessible to any and all men. If they're not reading it, it's on them. Dinner schemers, in turn, are simply leveraging the vagina power nature gave them; it's like faulting a rich person for buying an Escalade.
The ONLY acceptable exception to the above is dinner with a serious long-term girlfriend.
People wonder why life like AI robots for sex and other things are becoming so popular. I personally don't want to deal with snowflakes, sjws and people in general who need a "safe space". Give me a hot looking, sexy AI robot that can clean, cook and meet any of my sexual desires and needs any day over dealing with idiots like the person who posted that crap on FB.
You are not the only one But unfortunately, a life like robot that can do everything you describe is decades away. And then it will probably be very expensive.
I am also sure that once the female looking robots start drastically improving, man hating Feminist mafia will find ways to ban them. They will claim that mean are exploiting poor little robots or some similar BS.
I am sure you are also laughing at the original statement as well. The statements that pretending to like someone to have sex should be considered sexual assault.
A few years back a NJ lawmaker proposed legislation that lying to a woman to gain her favors would be considered rape.
Elected legislators are proposing the unimaginable and still get re-elected.
Any law that portrays a woman as a victim, suggests women are incapable of being responsible for them selves and need protection. So much for the equality effort.
women lying to men is fine.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But unfortunately, a life like robot that can do everything you describe is decades away. And then it will probably be very expensive. 
