Welcome to Gaia! :: View User's Journal | Gaia Journals

About the birthcontrol "conspiracy", I don't really see how you came to that conclusion. Contraceptives have been around for thousands of years, but they obviously haven't been as effective as they are today. But the point being, that they were made those many years ago because it has ALWAYS been in the nature of humans to mate and breed, just like any other animal. Preservation through breeding is one of the most basic needs of any living organism. So to believe that modern birthcontrol has anything particular and radical to do with the sexdrive of women, is naive. You can't really blame nature for doing what nature is supposed to do. But knowing you, I don't think that was your intention.

I understood your intention was to bash the women who only engage with men for physical satisfaction. But to be honest, I don't really see a problem there, either. Again, it's part of human nature. Just because you remove the risk of getting pregnant, does not remove the libido. Sex -is- a powerful tool and has always been and will always be. And there will always be people who "sell" themselves to achieve something. It could be money but could also be affection or a sense of security or just for pleasure or whatever. I don't really see a problem with that either.

Also, you can't expect a woman (or a guy, for that matter) to fall in love with you by first sight. I think that is naive as well. Yes, you can be physically attracted or infatuated/fascinated or interested in someone. But that does not automatically equal life-long commitment and/or love.

The reason why it's "an accepted truth" is beacuse it is the truth.

And you telling that you're "holding out for a special girl" does not necessarily equal an invitation for other girls to get closer to you. Unless you meant a "general special girl". But instead of bashing the women for "giving up", just feel great knowing that they're not for you. That only means you haven't wasted several weeks on them.

About the women breaking things off when it gets too serious:
I can only speak for myself. I can date people and have fun with them. I can say and wish for a meaningful, long commitment but that does not mean that my current date is the right choice in the long run. If it doesn't feel right when push comes to shove, then there is no need to continue it.

Also, the general "people want what they cannot have" seems to apply veeery often. You strive to get something and once it's available, you lose interest. It applies to trivial matters as well as crushes and infatuation. But this is nothing new under the sun. It's been the same circus for years on end. And even though back in the day, tradition may have played a big part of keeping people together, things still weren't very different. Back then you married for prestige, money (there we have it again) and to continue a prosperous and financially secure lineage (breeding). Not necessarily (sometimes even rarely) out of love.

First paragraph we already agreed to disagree on that... Maybe some woman are already crazy or become crazy after the shot. I'm not just saying this, I'm speaking from experience. Your a woman so I can't really top you and have no intention on topping you in information. I'm simply saying what what I see every 3 months, what woman tell me every three months after taking the shot/not taking the shot..... Anyway there is enough info on Google.

2 what ever suits them works. I just don't see the point of sex for anything other than the love of the special person. Sex is human nature but killing is also human nature, lying is human nature, but we don't do it when ever we get the urge. If humans can't control the urge to breed then how can they expect to call themselves better than animals.

3 I never said anything about love at first sight, I just want people to know the people they are in bed with.. I believe meet greet and sex isn't really getting the world anywhere.

4 I get what you're saying I am more grateful than you think for holding out. But what I am saying woman shouldn't get angry for the 2 week guy dumping them when they're looking for a 2 week guy instead of a lifetime guy.

5 nothing to say. If he can't handle the long run with you then his loss.

6. True but when I get what I'm after I only seek to add more to it and never throw it away or loose interest in it. So i don't really get that. I am a greedy tiger. XD

Last but not least, People married out of love forgetting their heritage willing to live with out support in order to marry those they love. And true people did marry out of prestige, etc and because of that it became more popular. More people marrying people they don't know or in all honesty marrying people they hate, lying to themselves and others, constantly hiding, secrets and more secrets piling on one another. The children that are born into that, the people who live around that, the other people who followed that example. At a certain point in history money became more important than life.

And that brings us to the world we live in today. A world where people hate the very people they are married to, hides the truth constantly. And people like that tend to take out there anger on those around them. Yes it is the truth. what you say is true. That's why I call it the hated truth, but there are many truths as there are people..... I just believe in my truth,


lol I do have interesting thoughts..... the things I know about this world is beyond amazing.

I first saw your response just now. I will respond according to your numbered paragraphs.

2) That you don't see the point in having sex, for no other reason than being in love, is simply how you function. Because you don't see the point or understand something that's deviant from your own beliefs, does not make other opinions/truths/whatever false or less meaningful. But I see, you make that same conclusion at the end of your response, so all is fine on that point.

But....

I don't really think you can compare killing to sex. Firstly, killing is illegal, which means the act of killing another human has severe consequences for the culprit, which equals a certain respect to follow the law. If there was no law against killing, the murder rate would rise significantly, yes. But even without a law, killing would/could still breed dire consequences for the murderer: the victim's family and other relations, could seek vengeance, thus creating unfavorable risks for the murderer, which again creates a certain respect and willingness to avoid killing = willingness to control the urge (if you have it).

Sex, on the other hand, doesn't breed as severe consequences as killing (in most modern countries, anyway). It is NOT illegal (in some states and in certain religions, yes). It is a nondestructive urge to create life, not end it. It doesn't really hurt anyone, unless other factors are in play, such as jealousy or someone's bruised morals, etc.

Furthermore, everybody lies. EVERYBODY, several times a day, even. You lie when someone asks you how you're doing, and you say you're okay, but you really feel like s**t. You lie when you say your grandmother's cookies taste good (because it's polite), when they taste like s**t. You lie to all those people, that don't know the real you and your real thoughts, etc. It is possible that lying is a basic trait in human nature, yes. Can it be controlled? Possibly, but hardly, and it wouldn't be too favorable. There are far too many situations that calls for lying, to some degree.

And why do you assume humans are better than animals? That statement actually surprised me a lot, coming from you. Humans are animals. We have urges, similar to many other animals. Survive and breed, to narrow it down very simplistically. The difference being, that we're apparently also able to think abstractly and question everything. I think that's the biggest difference. But that doesn't necessarily make us better than other animals. If you ask me, that makes us tragically worse and misplaced in the world. I believe, the further we try to better ourselves and our society, the more far off we get from our natural path of surviving and breeding, and the more displaced from human nature we get. Is that a good thing? Does that make us better? I don't think so. Just take a look around at western society. Depression everywhere. Suicides everywhere. Everything has become convenient. We don't have to do anything majorly active, to survive nor breed, anymore. We have nothing to do, really, other than promote a society that's so far away from humans original nature, that it's kind of ******** up, if you ask me. But's that's a completely different discussion.

What I'm trying to say, is that sex is a normal and basic drive in MOST humans. There are always deviants, one way or the other. Some don't have a libido. Some refrain from sex because of taught morals and ethics. Some only have sex in certain contexts (love, money, prestige, marriage, breeding) etc. But the point is, that's what we do, as a species. There is nothing wrong with it, and essentially there is no natural reason to control it. If there was, we wouldn't have a sex drive in the first place. That we're overpopulating the earth, is a different issue of society, yet another good reason, to use contraceptives (aside from health issues, etc). But it is not an issue of human nature. I hope I'm being clear on what I mean.

3) What exactly is it you believe 'one night stands' prohibits? If no one did one night stands, what is it you believe the world would achieve, then?

4) People make weird choices. Many people go for certain types, in the hopes of 'changing' them to be whatever else they want. I agree they shouldn't get angry, but that's really out of your control. Though, you can't really determine whether a person is a 'life-timer' or not. You can't predict the future. The right person today, might be the wrong person tomorrow or 10-30-50 years from now. People change, and so do their partners, interests, attractions, etc.

5) I don't think you understood what I wrote. (;

6) That's so easy to say, when you haven't reached the goal yet. There's a reason people find new goals to pursue, when they've completed previous ones. People get bored/disappointed.

7) SOME people married out of love, yes. But keep in mind, those were rare. People today are MUCH MORE prone to marry out of love, than 60 years ago and beyond. The institution of family reigned supreme most of the time, and the most important thing was survival and breeding (there we have it again) and to ensure the family to live on. Parent's most often had the final say. They reigned over the financial matters, and if their sons and daughters didn't marry the ones the parents chose, the children would often be disowned - and that was a scary thought back then, where there was nothing called social/financial aid.

You had your family, and that was it. I'm sure some families were less concerned about the marriage of their offspring, but it was rare. Family first, individual romances second or not relevant. The reason most of them stayed together their entire life, wasn't necessarily because they loved each other. Surely some kind of bond could have sprouted. Love could have grown with the years. But if not, you didn't divorce, because that was against religion and an EXTREME outrage/disgrace. You stayed together, because you had to. Society dictated such. The bible dictated such. TRADITION dictated such. A divorced woman had little to no chance of ever getting remarried. She was considered extremely undesirable. Often enough, women didn't have jobs and weren't desirable employees = they ended up in institutions for the poor or back with their disapproving family (if they cared to take in such a failure). Men had a way better chance of getting remarried and getting jobs.

In conclusion, most people stayed together because the other choice posed very undesirable consequences. If they were as liberated from tradition back then, as we are now, then surely there wouldn't be any difference in divorce ratings, then and now. It's downright naive to believe in some romanticized fantasy, that people stayed together their entire lives, in tradition bound societies, solely based on mutual, unconditional love.

Today we are liberated from most of that traditional humbug. At least, in the western society. Some of the reasons, are not because we've become more 'animal like' or because we're more stupid or more insincere than back then. One of the most prominent reasons, is because we are no longer dependent on the institution of family, in the same sense, as back then. At least not, those with a certain independent wealth. We have all we need. Compared to back then, we can all get jobs easier. We can get financial aid. It's not an extreme outrage to seek help with other family members or friends. It's not social suicide, to change partners. You will not get disowned for choosing your partner. The wealthier we are, the less we need other people to rely on. If you take very poverty stricken areas, you will see, that people tend to stay together much more, than in wealthy areas. Much like tradition bound societies of the past. Because in poverty stricken areas, people rely on each other's support and wealth. An example: the woman who is dating an abusive a*****e for his money = she stays with him, because he provides a certain sense of financial/social stability = survival. And independent person with a stable income, etc, is more prone to choose to be single. Like you and I, for example.

And surely, people lie and all that, in modern relationships. They also did that back in the olden days. Again, just because people stayed together their whole life, did not equal a happy marriage or unconditional love. They could hate each other loads, most likely. But you did not break the tradition. That's the ONLY difference from then and now. People, in essence, have not changed. Society and social rules have.

Lol wow I am just reading this. OKAY lets get this started back up!

Response to 2nd paragraph... .I was just comparing human nature and how it is possible to control a urge. A person can always kill regardless of law or the consequences if they have the sudden urge to but most time they restrain themselves and walk away. Even in some cultures where killing is legal if a certain crime is committed a few people are spared death because the person who was by law well withing their right to kill person/s chose mercy. And the point I was trying to get across is that it's possible to control urges and be better than someone that lives on impulses..

Sex, life, etc. anything can have major consequences if not done responsibly. So yes sex has consequences unprotected sex between multiple partners can cause a whole mess of problems. Sex and not wanting to take responsibility for the child can have a devastating impact on a child life. Not to mention if he is lucky enough not to get aborted. Again I'm not saying stop all together I'm just saying try to control the urge or at the very least be responsible with it.

Lol Yes Humans have so much potential and can be way better than animals. Just as you said most people are completely ******** up same for western society but to me it's a clear cut example of greedy impulses/urges running amok. If anything western society as a whole is taking steps back on the evolutionary scale to the point that you can't tell a person from an animal. And everyone bows down to the almighty dollar. Sure some may say it's progress but it a lie and deep down most people know it. I may live it but I refuse to add to it. but that a different topic. I guess what I'm trying to say is what happen to sex because a person was in love not because they're horny. Which there really isn't a problem with being horny just when a person chooses a sex partner they shouldn't choose them just because they want sex too.

3. I believe in love then sex.. Not sex and then love. Mostly because a person always changes there mind at some point in the middle. In which case a there are consequences or duty a person doesn't take responsibility for after sex.
But if love is there first then there is almost no chance a person will change there mind before or after sex. Plus when love is involved with sex a person is always there for the partner no matter what. At least that what I think.

4. You may be right, but I don't believe a person will change who they love. If they do then it may have never been there.

7. I get what you're saying and I'm just saying it would be a lot easier and better for everyone if a person married because they loved their partner and not because it they had to.

Lol been soo long I'm out of the debate mind set I had when we started this. Sorry for the late respond.