A REVOLUTION I think we can ALL get behind! - Page 9 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-03-2005, 01:13 PM   #121
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,492
Local Time: 12:00 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
Explain.

well, earlier you wrote: "Actually, I was argued that I was conditioned to find them sexual. It's like trying to lose your accent, I don't think I could be as faithful as I desire to be to the woman I love if this became acceptable."


it's a very boys-will-be-boys argument. that women need to be covered up so they will retain their mystery and allure for the menfolk, as if the reason for feminine modesty is not to drive the men crazy with lust and desire -- basically implying that it is up to women and society to regulate and control the female figure because men are deep down lustful creatures and can't control themselves. sort of a "women, watch your men!" argument.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 03-03-2005, 01:23 PM   #122
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 01:00 AM
Thanks for clarifying.

I would admit that your explanation is pretty accurate for the most part, and you don't have to buy into the argument if you choose not to. Although it wouldn't exactly be a VIOLENT crime decriminalized, it would still be a crime of indecency in my eyes. If you look at the divorce rates, they're pretty extreme. Why feed more lust in our society than the lust that already exists? Deep down, I try hard not to be a lustful creature, yet I wonder if I'm the only one after seeing so few opposing responses on this thread.
__________________

__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 03-03-2005, 01:29 PM   #123
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,492
Local Time: 12:00 AM
i don't view lust as a bad thing. i enjoy lust, and think it's a natural part of being human.

sometimes i ignore it, sometimes i take care of it myself, sometimes i find a partner. it exists, and that's fine -- but i remain in control of my lust and i don't need society to regulate it for me, i'm entirely capable of doing that myself. just because i'm a man doesn't mean that my sex drive is any more or less powerful than a woman, nor does it mean that woman should be any more or less regulated than i am. we are adults, we take responsibility for our actions.

i hope i'm still as lustful at 57 as i am at 27.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 03-03-2005, 01:44 PM   #124
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 12:00 AM
The thread title should be "Lust for the Bust"
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 03-03-2005, 02:42 PM   #125
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 09:00 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511


i hope i'm still as lustful at 57 as i am at 27.
let's hope you are not.

i am getting close to the 5 0
and things have moderated just a bit

i rarely embarrass myself, anymore
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 03-03-2005, 02:57 PM   #126
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,492
Local Time: 12:00 AM
deep -- are you a dude or chick?

i honestly have no idea.

just curious.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 03-03-2005, 02:57 PM   #127
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 12:00 AM
Dude....

But that is debateable...lol
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 03-03-2005, 03:34 PM   #128
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 01:00 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
i don't view lust as a bad thing. i enjoy lust, and think it's a natural part of being human.
I find that interesting. I don't know how else to say it.

Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
i hope i'm still as lustful at 57 as i am at 27.
Perhaps this is where we differ the most.
__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 03-03-2005, 03:43 PM   #129
Refugee
 
all_i_want's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,180
Local Time: 08:00 AM
the religions view lust as a sin... what can i say. its a lie made up by rabbis/imams/priests so that some other guys wont bang their wives.

edit: lets say catholic priests are concerned about other people banging other people's wives
__________________
all_i_want is offline  
Old 03-03-2005, 04:03 PM   #130
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 11:00 PM
Quote:
that women need to be covered up so they will retain their mystery and allure for the menfolk, as if the reason for feminine modesty is not to drive the men crazy with lust and desire -- basically implying that it is up to women and society to regulate and control the female figure because men are deep down lustful creatures and can't control themselves. sort of a "women, watch your men!" argument.
And you agree to this?

Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe

I would admit that your explanation is pretty accurate for the most part, and you don't have to buy into the argument if you choose not to. Although it wouldn't exactly be a VIOLENT crime decriminalized, it would still be a crime of indecency in my eyes.
I think you may be insane.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 03-03-2005, 05:51 PM   #131
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 01:00 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
I think you may be insane.
The feeling is mutual.
__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 03-03-2005, 06:15 PM   #132
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 11:00 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
The feeling is mutual.
Because I believe in equal rights and believe that the responsibility should lie in the hands of the perpetrator?

You just got finished saying you agreed with the notion that society and women bear the burden of keeping the lustful actions of men in control and not the men.

That's insane. It's that caveman mentality that allows sexual perpetrators to walk away without responsibility, by blaming the women for stimulating men's lustful actions too much.

Show me where my actions are insane.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 03-03-2005, 07:20 PM   #133
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Saracene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Melbourne, Australia, some time after tea
Posts: 6,325
Local Time: 05:00 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Moonlit_Angel
Both sexes have nipples. Both sexes have chests. The only difference lies in how they're formed, which isn't either sex's fault, that's just how the body came to be.
Sure, anatomical difference may not be significant, but would you say that people respond exactly the same way to the exposed male and female chests? One could wish that conditioning like this didn't exist, but it clearly does and exhibits itself in a great many ways too. In fact, precisely because of sexualisation and the fact that the breasts are considered to be a sexual asset to a woman, women in certain circumstances are allowed to expose a whole lot more of chest area than men are. A woman can show up at the restaurant/social function/premiere wearing a low-cut dress or see-through top that leaves nothing to imagination, but a man who's not wearing a proper shirt or top would cause comment or be thrown out. Same goes of the many fashions of the previous centuries, as well: men are buttoned up to their chins, but with women, heck, it's cleavage galore!
__________________
Saracene is offline  
Old 03-03-2005, 07:22 PM   #134
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 12:00 AM
How the heck have so many other cultures survived without covering up the women?

Just curious!
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 03-03-2005, 08:00 PM   #135
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,269
Local Time: 11:00 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Saracene
Sure, anatomical difference may not be significant, but would you say that people respond exactly the same way to the exposed male and female chests? One could wish that conditioning like this didn't exist, but it clearly does and exhibits itself in a great many ways too.
Yes, but it's still up to each person to decide how they want to handle it. Other people shouldn't have to cover themselves so much if they don't want to simply because some people will react a certain way to how they look. For all those who react lustfully to a girl's breasts, there'll be others who won't-I even remember a guy saying one time that he didn't understand the big craze over breasts...he didn't understand why people made such a big deal out of them, 'cause that wasn't the feature he found the most attractive on a girl. And then there's girls that would be the same way-some will go gaga over a six-pack, while to others, it won't mean squat. Everyone's different, we can't all conform to look a certain way on the off chance that somebody out there may react in some fashion to how we look.

Quote:
Originally posted by Saracene
In fact, precisely because of sexualisation and the fact that the breasts are considered to be a sexual asset to a woman, women in certain circumstances are allowed to expose a whole lot more of chest area than men are. A woman can show up at the restaurant/social function/premiere wearing a low-cut dress or see-through top that leaves nothing to imagination, but a man who's not wearing a proper shirt or top would cause comment or be thrown out. Same goes of the many fashions of the previous centuries, as well: men are buttoned up to their chins, but with women, heck, it's cleavage galore!
And I think that's dumb. I don't think anyone should be punished for how they choose to look, I think everybody should dress however they want to-if they want to be covered up from head to toe, fine, if they want to walk around with next to no clothing, fine-the bottom line is, it's their body, they should have the right to decide how much of it they want to be seen, not society. Anyone who's bothered by how someone dresses simply doesn't have to look (and it really is not that hard to do so, either-unless they're right up in someone's face, they'll be able to get them out of their vision if they're really bothered by it). And they don't have to like how the person looks, either-they can say all they want that they don't like the outfit, it's not flattering, all that stuff. But to tell others what they can and can't put on their own bodies just seems very odd to me.

Also, I agree wholeheartedly with Irvine (you're a guy? Heh, I thought you were a girl for the longest time ...) in regards to the lust post. Why exactly is lust such a bad thing, anyway?

Angela
__________________

__________________
Moonlit_Angel is online now  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com