Unacceptable Restrictions in Relationships?

[Esheaun Stroakuss]

Which makes it worse, because the American Dream aligns with my personal ones of equality of opportunity and all that jazz, but in the fifties they purposefully excluded certain groups.

[The Legion of Mankind]

May I ask if you are a man/woman/non-binary? And also what your preference is in relationships?

Cis white male who unfortunately is attracted to women, which makes me feel somewhat shameful.

Wha-

[Esheaun Stroakuss]

wow ok

[The Blaatschapen]

Are you white? Because I hate to sound like the very people I criticise, but if you're white, then of course you would have great living standards. There was actual segregation and racism was institutional then. You would reap the rewards of a system that was ok with treating a demographic of people like dirt.

Here is the thing though, it doesnt have to be. You can wanat a home with a wife two kids, two cars, and not care if your neighbor is named Sanchez, or kuo, and still be neighborly if they are gay. What was wrong with america in the 50's was the exclusion of groups from the American dream, not the dream itself.

I am all for intergenerational economic mobility (I believe that is the American dream, right?). But nowadays it is getting harder to attain unless your parents already had it. Especially in the US of A.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_ ... l_mobility

[Cekoviu]

More accurately, Аs, Bs, and Ωs are all the same thing: deeply flawed terms made up by misogynistic bachelors to wallow in self pity more easily instead of being proactive.

Well yes, it could certainly be used in this way. But I prefer to think of it as merely your current status and nothing that is set in stone. Of course its much harder to change your ranking than it is to passively accept your default personality or nature as fate. But in terms of genetics, it kind of is.

I had good looks, but my personality and habits made me an Omega nonetheless. In the context of the sexual marketplace, I was unavailable (via being unapproachable) which is nearly the same as being worthless to other people and society in terms of reproductive potential. The primary means of improving myself to at least Beta status would be to put myself out there socially, or to get enough game.

If you're trying to do that, I certainly hope you're not telling people with whom you're socializing about how feminism has turned men into betas and black people are ruining America, as you do with us. That's not going to do you any favors.

Wha-

Self-hating male, basically. About as annoying as, or more annoying than, a misogynist.

More likely, a shitty "parody" account.

[Saiwania]

To respond to the OP, unacceptable restrictions in my view- would mainly fall under trying to control the other person's actions and giving them no freedom.
The acceptable restrictions, would be what falls under them maintaining your trust in them, such as the expectation that they don't cheat with another person behind your back or raid your bank account for a shopping spree or whatever without explanation or permission.

It is of course, a two way street.

[Cekoviu]

To respond to the OP, unacceptable restrictions in my view- would mainly fall under trying to control the other person's actions and giving them no freedom.
The acceptable restrictions, would be what falls under them maintaining your trust in them, such as the expectation that they don't cheat with another person behind your back or raid your bank account for a shopping spree or whatever without explanation or permission.

It is of course, a two way street.

Huh, surprisingly reasonable.

[Ethel mermania]

Here is the thing though, it doesnt have to be. You can wanat a home with a wife two kids, two cars, and not care if your neighbor is named Sanchez, or kuo, and still be neighborly if they are gay. What was wrong with america in the 50's was the exclusion of groups from the American dream, not the dream itself.

I am all for intergenerational economic mobility (I believe that is the American dream, right?). But nowadays it is getting harder to attain unless your parents already had it. Especially in the US of A.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_ ... l_mobility

The largest determinant of upward Mobility among the amercian poor is the whether the nuclear family is intact or not. Most folks dont like to hear that.

I do kinda think we are drifting off topic.

[Esheaun Stroakuss]

More likely, a shitty "parody" account.

Well, given his previous threads displaying a sheer lack of knowledge about communism - considering he claims to be one - I'll go for "yes".

[Thepeopl]

Even if it is true that some women are like that and do those things, it does not mean all of them do it. It's too broad a demographic - literally over half of the world's population - to generalise.

Never claimed it included all women, but it is too common for a lot of people's liking. This didn't happen as much in the past because tradition was more strongly upheld. Everyone was mostly on the same page so far as how relations between the sexes are supposed to work. Then starting in the 1960s, we got Feminism and radical Leftism and gradually it screwed everything up in the courtship world.

Today, we have 40,000+ years of evolution running up against counterproductive beliefs and practices that have only been around for a few generations at best that is resulting in a bunch of angry and dissatisfied women who feel men are an obstacle to their success, with men just as disappointed in the quality of today's women who were brought up believing in a bunch of nonsense about how they should be "strong and independent, etc." instead of traditionally feminine.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrifocal_family

[Saiwania]

To the OP, I'd place all of the examples you gave in the unreasonable category.

1. They didn't allow any outside friends probably out of insecurities. They probably think it enables easy cheating, perhaps it could if they can't be trusted.

2. Usually a no porn requirement is unreasonable, but it could be if the other person agrees to such a restriction. At minimum it is tempting at times.

3. She probably doesn't like them approving other pictures because they're insecure or don't trust them. They're probably older, while the online pictures look better in their mind and they're jealous.

4. This isn't good in most cases, they do this because they're controlling, have an inferiority complex, or simply don't like that person and thus never want them around.

5. That is an example of just being controlling. It'd be hypocritical if they don't live by that same rule. Arguably could be understood more if it was just them attempting a blanket ban on any alcohol. In that case, it is because they don't like it one bit so far as an influence goes.

[Afghanistan Punjab and Kashmir]

To the OP, I'd place all of the examples you gave in the unreasonable category.

1. They didn't allow any outside friends probably out of insecurities. They probably think it enables easy cheating, perhaps it could if they can't be trusted.

2. Usually a no porn requirement is unreasonable, but it could be if the other person agrees to such a restriction. At minimum it is tempting at times.

3. She probably doesn't like them approving other pictures because they're insecure or don't trust them. They're probably older, while the online pictures look better in their mind and they're jealous.

4. This isn't good in most cases, they do this because they're controlling, have an inferiority complex, or simply don't like that person and thus never want them around.

5. That is an example of just being controlling. It'd be hypocritical if they don't live by that same rule. Arguably could be understood more if it was just them attempting a blanket ban on any alcohol. In that case, it is because they don't like it one bit so far as an influence goes.

The no friends thing is unreasonable.

[Fahran]

May I ask if you are a man/woman/non-binary? And also what your preference is in relationships?

Cis white male who unfortunately is attracted to women, which makes me feel somewhat shameful.

Why would you feel ashamed about that? I don't feel ashamed about being attracted to men.

[Chestaan]

Masturbation is creating an imaginary, conceptual image of a person in your head for the purpose of living out fantasies you construct in your head. It does not in itself reduce the person you are imagining to an object in real life, merely playing out a form of creative wish fulfillment in your imagination. Imagination and experimentation are how we explore our sexuality. They're how we figure out what we are interested in sexually, as well as familiarizing ourselves with our bodies and how to properly stimulate and use them.

An active sexual imagination and familiarity with your body is incredibly important to having good sex. It helps to take out the guesswork, and allows you to better communicate with your partner over what you want done to you, as well as enabling you to have a better idea of what you want to actually do with your partner when you're in the moment.

I understand if for you, the idea that you may be objectifying someone makes this act undesirable, and you are welcome to continue abstaining from it in your own life. But when you make broad condemnations of healthy sexual behavior and self exploration that most people engage in and most people are accepting of and consent to in their relationships, you are demanding that people sacrifice their own desires and fulfillment just because it's something you wouldn't do.

I disagree that it's healthy. While one should enjoy sex, sex shouldn't be about self-gratification, it should be about loving your partner, and because of that, masturbation, which is purely self-gratifying, cannot be moral.

What if your partner wants you to masturbate because it turns them on?

[US-SSR]

Masturbation is creating an imaginary, conceptual image of a person in your head for the purpose of living out fantasies you construct in your head. It does not in itself reduce the person you are imagining to an object in real life, merely playing out a form of creative wish fulfillment in your imagination. Imagination and experimentation are how we explore our sexuality. They're how we figure out what we are interested in sexually, as well as familiarizing ourselves with our bodies and how to properly stimulate and use them.

An active sexual imagination and familiarity with your body is incredibly important to having good sex. It helps to take out the guesswork, and allows you to better communicate with your partner over what you want done to you, as well as enabling you to have a better idea of what you want to actually do with your partner when you're in the moment.

I understand if for you, the idea that you may be objectifying someone makes this act undesirable, and you are welcome to continue abstaining from it in your own life. But when you make broad condemnations of healthy sexual behavior and self exploration that most people engage in and most people are accepting of and consent to in their relationships, you are demanding that people sacrifice their own desires and fulfillment just because it's something you wouldn't do.

I disagree that it's healthy. While one should enjoy sex, sex shouldn't be about self-gratification, it should be about loving your partner, and because of that, masturbation, which is purely self-gratifying, cannot be moral.

Eating food that tastes good to you is purely self-gratifying. Is eating tasty food moral?

[Fahran]

Eating food that tastes good to you is purely self-gratifying. Is eating tasty food moral?

Only if you're a positive hedonist of some sort.

[US-SSR]

If a man has ejaculated, but maintains an erection, he can keep satisfying the woman. The best orgasms for some women are number 25 or higher. So if you can maintain an erection for 45 minutes, those women will not complain.

This is more often not possible. For most men, orgasm is tied to ejaculation and the two can't meaningfully be separated. The entire point of getting off for a man, is so he can go soft again down there. Women who think over 20 minutes at best is normal, have the bar set too high so far as realistic expectations. I'd be willing to bet that most ladies aren't going to find that.

In my experience it is. There's no physiological reason a man in reasonable shape, within a certain age range and with a willing and experienced partner can't maintain an erection even after multiple ejaculations. To each his and/or her own, but to flatly state no man can keep it up for more than 20 minutes, or that no women can be satisfied ever with anything less, is imo a sign of a lack of practical knowledge at best.

[Aclion]

If a man has ejaculated, but maintains an erection, he can keep satisfying the woman. The best orgasms for some women are number 25 or higher. So if you can maintain an erection for 45 minutes, those women will not complain.

This is more often not possible. For most men, orgasm is tied to ejaculation and the two can't meaningfully be separated. The entire point of getting off for a man, is so he can go soft again down there. Women who think over 20 minutes at best is normal, have the bar set too high so far as realistic expectations. I'd be willing to bet that most ladies aren't going to find that.

Orange juice.

[New haven america]

A woman actually dating me.

I could never put a person through such hell.

[New haven america]

This is more often not possible. For most men, orgasm is tied to ejaculation and the two can't meaningfully be separated. The entire point of getting off for a man, is so he can go soft again down there. Women who think over 20 minutes at best is normal, have the bar set too high so far as realistic expectations. I'd be willing to bet that most ladies aren't going to find that.

Orange juice.

Grape juice.

[US-SSR]

Orange juice.

Grape juice.

Back in the day, for me, the fermented variety.

[Kowani]

Eating food that tastes good to you is purely self-gratifying. Is eating tasty food moral?

Only if you're a positive hedonist of some sort.

You called?

[Thepeopl]

Only if you're a positive hedonist of some sort.

You called?

So I can't go to the museum, cinema, theatre or even take a stroll in the park?
All self gratification. And what about having a shower or bath. Do not tell me you don't enjoy that. Snuggling down into a freshly made bed, smelling mown grass, really taste your food, letting chocolate melt in your mouth and truly experience the sweet/ bitter/ creamy sensation.