Thread: I did my girlfriend reeeeal dirty...

https://youtu.be/4-MNA5QyHjc

Hmm. Sorry, but what is this?

Also no intro (as far as I can see).

Mods alerted...

Originally Posted by Boar

Mods alerted...

Ditto.

Troll. Banned. Thank you, members, for the Reports.

I didnt click at the video link, but actually this is a good subject.

Why is it that some people need to introduce humiliation, depravity or simply make sex "dirty"?

And I am not talking about men doing it, but women to. There is some kind of psychological damage when a woman likes being called names or degraded to have more pleasure.

In my life I have recognized a factor that is "escalation". Making sex much more important than it should, the promise of nirvana is never going to be fulfilled. Thus people look for something more: another position, another hole, another act... It is the illusory search for the new, and normalization of the old.

In fact it is a descent to hell, that can be thoroughly described in the books of Sade. There is even a movie (allegedly intellectual) with an adaptation of the books! I dont recommend after lunch...

So, the blue pill desperation for sex, resulting from a sex obsessed society, produces these psychological degradations, either of self or the other. (Not to mention innocent cats, as readers of Sade can attest).

It is necessary for a good red pill administration that one sees sex for what it is: a simple physiologic function.

Once the cost analysis is done, and the end goal of permanent matting is no longer desired, then all the process is meaningless.
Higher values apply, like self-worth, self-validation and self-respect, that are reflected on how we treat others, and the people we keep around or kick the hell out of our lives... like this troll.

Originally Posted by Manfred

I didnt click at the video link, but actually this is a good subject.

Why is it that some people need to introduce humiliation, depravity or simply make sex "dirty"?

And I am not talking about men doing it, but women to. There is some kind of psychological damage when a woman likes being called names or degraded to have more pleasure.

In my life I have recognized a factor that is "escalation". Making sex much more important than it should, the promise of nirvana is never going to be fulfilled. Thus people look for something more: another position, another hole, another act... It is the illusory search for the new, and normalization of the old.

In fact it is a descent to hell, that can be thoroughly described in the books of Sade. There is even a movie (allegedly intellectual) with an adaptation of the books! I dont recommend after lunch...

So, the blue pill desperation for sex, resulting from a sex obsessed society, produces these psychological degradations, either of self or the other. (Not to mention innocent cats, as readers of Sade can attest).

It is necessary for a good red pill administration that one sees sex for what it is: a simple physiologic function.

Once the cost analysis is done, and the end goal of permanent matting is no longer desired, then all the process is meaningless.
Higher values apply, like self-worth, self-validation and self-respect, that are reflected on how we treat others, and the people we keep around or kick the hell out of our lives... like this troll.

I have never read, nor do I intend to read, the Marquis de Sade.

However you refer to the blue-pill desperation for sex. No doubt this desire is exacerbated by blue-pill doctrine, but is it not more to do with the physiological?

In our youth we are driven by biological imperatives we cannot begin to understand at such a young age and as such seek to act more like the wild animals we supposedly evolved from.

Only with experience do we see the meaninglessness of it all, that sex in and of itself guarantees nothing but momentary satisfaction, and it's pursuit is nothing more than a dream riddled with dangers.

I think there is cognitive dissonance between what our conscious (neocortex) brains think we want and what our reptilian brain wants. Women's primitive brain want a strong dominant man, and men what a submissive women. Because of all the conscious BS, our baser desires are suppressed and it come out in extreme fetish.

Originally Posted by Jackoff

In our youth we are driven by biological imperatives we cannot begin to understand at such a young age and as such seek to act more like the wild animals we supposedly evolved from.

Except animals do not degrade themselves. Their sexual interaction is instinctive and functional, not recreational, emotional or neurotic.

One thing is to act out instincts, another is to act out psychological issues. I think the two get confused.

Originally Posted by pbisque

I think there is cognitive dissonance between what our conscious (neocortex) brains think we want and what our reptilian brain wants. Women's primitive brain want a strong dominant man, and men what a submissive women. Because of all the conscious BS, our baser desires are suppressed and it come out in extreme fetish.

Agreed. The dominant/submissive archetype runs deep in the human mind.
But the incessant exploration of the sexual subject has an harmful impact. When we associate morality, religion, social status and even self-worth to sex, them a lot of trash is created.

And the great human tool that is communication has a major impact. Every piece of trash in a guy's mind can be disseminated in form of book, movie, video...

People fail to see the reality behind the media, they only see the imagination: theirs and the author's.

I am talking about porn and its evolution. If you go to a major porn site today most titles revolve behind "incest". That is the latest perversion.
This stuff is like a virus, that spreads through open minds due to strong visual and auditory stimulation. The key is that people do not experience reality, just a hyped simulacrum of a pseudo-reality. And the more inaccessible or forbidden the act is, the worst is the allure.

That is the key to understand sex as a weapon: it is inaccessibility that makes it special. Because deep down it is a simple physiological act. The "magic" is in our (male) minds.

I missed it, darn!!!
Welcome to my life.

Originally Posted by Knarley Bob

I missed it, darn!!!
Welcome to my life.

When the shit hits the fan, I wanna be around you! So I can miss it!

There is some kind of psychological damage when a woman likes being called names or degraded to have more pleasure.

I don't know about that mate.

I think this is a common misconception. If a couple enjoys degrading and insulting each other during sex, that doesn't automatically mean they are somehow psychologically damaged.

There are plenty of 'high functioning' individuals (both men and women) who find this kind of sex satisfying. And sometimes, penetrative sex is not even involved. (in the case of people going to a dominatrix).

So, the blue pill desperation for sex, resulting from a sex obsessed society, produces these psychological degradations, either of self or the other. (Not to mention innocent cats, as readers of Sade can attest).

African Daoist mentioned this before and I keep hearing that our society (the western world) is ''sex obsessed''. That is absolutely laughable.

I come from the Middle East and let me tell you, western society is strangely becoming extremely conservative about sex.

You have pseudo-sexual freedoms like pornography. But where is the exciting passionate sex which everyone ought to be engaging in? Where? Tell me where? Apart from media, art, TV, and internet?

That is not real sex, between two real human beings.

It is necessary for a good red pill administration that one sees sex for what it is: a simple physiologic function.

This would be true if human beings were rational creatures. Unfortunately, they aren't and men get stuck in this 'logicalism' which is usually not beneficial to them. They end up misunderstanding the way the world really works.

Yes, we are animals and a part of the natural world, but we cannot be reduced to some scientific or logical study.

Conservatism of sex is a result of women pushing most men away to share the top tier alpha as they use this type of puritan streak to suppress the men that they do not consider part of the top 10%. When a woman says she has a boyfriend but is hazy on the details it is a clear fitness test, but in this current climate of pound me too is it worth passing such a shit aka fitness test?

Jagrmeister and others have talked about women giving into this primal instinct of chasing and sharing an alpha prime and how society is going backwards sexually where fewer men have sex. And the men that do have sex often are in ONS, flings, sugar baby or fuck buddy arrangements which lacks the intimacy which was often tied to sexuality between men and women.

That is why we are seeing more and more extremes in the human sexuality spectrum with BDSM rising with women while men are going toward porn and other sexual stimuli. The casualty in such extremes is simple intimacy and trust that sex brings and how women with low N count used to bond with men.

Originally Posted by Manfred

I didnt click at the video link, but actually this is a good subject.

Why is it that some people need to introduce humiliation, depravity or simply make sex "dirty"?

And I am not talking about men doing it, but women to. There is some kind of psychological damage when a woman likes being called names or degraded to have more pleasure.

In my life I have recognized a factor that is "escalation". Making sex much more important than it should, the promise of nirvana is never going to be fulfilled. Thus people look for something more: another position, another hole, another act... It is the illusory search for the new, and normalization of the old.

In fact it is a descent to hell, that can be thoroughly described in the books of Sade. There is even a movie (allegedly intellectual) with an adaptation of the books! I dont recommend after lunch...

So, the blue pill desperation for sex, resulting from a sex obsessed society, produces these psychological degradations, either of self or the other. (Not to mention innocent cats, as readers of Sade can attest).

It is necessary for a good red pill administration that one sees sex for what it is: a simple physiologic function.

Once the cost analysis is done, and the end goal of permanent matting is no longer desired, then all the process is meaningless.
Higher values apply, like self-worth, self-validation and self-respect, that are reflected on how we treat others, and the people we keep around or kick the hell out of our lives... like this troll.

I agree with most of your points, I dont like the idea of putting sex above everything else.

But I also agree that in personal/private life, there should be absolute liberty, as long as there is no cost imposed on any unwilling party, be it a person or society. If the act is between two people only, and there is no third, then I dont see it any different from playing a game of chess or a video game or anything, where the imaginations are more important than reality.

Though the moment someone else gets involved, things quickly gets into gray area. Say a child who is old enough to understand something weird is going on, and too young to fully understand whats going on. This can cause problems, a lot of problems maybe, depends on the situation and people involved.

The third party can be society at large, if they go out and start preaching their depravity out in the open. A functioning society needs some form of civil code of conduct, just like military needs discipline. Otherwise everything will fall apart rather quickly. Yeah they may say they'd rather see society breaking down instead of giving up their "freedom". Well, if things break down too much, there wont be food to eat and clean water to drink. No amount of "dirty sex" will fix the situation.

Originally Posted by rkspsm

I agree with most of your points, I dont like the idea of putting sex above everything else.

But I also agree that in personal/private life, there should be absolute liberty, as long as there is no cost imposed on any unwilling party, be it a person or society. If the act is between two people only, and there is no third, then I dont see it any different from playing a game of chess or a video game or anything, where the imaginations are more important than reality.

Though the moment someone else gets involved, things quickly gets into gray area. Say a child who is old enough to understand something weird is going on, and too young to fully understand whats going on. This can cause problems, a lot of problems maybe, depends on the situation and people involved.

The third party can be society at large, if they go out and start preaching their depravity out in the open. A functioning society needs some form of civil code of conduct, just like military needs discipline. Otherwise everything will fall apart rather quickly. Yeah they may say they'd rather see society breaking down instead of giving up their "freedom". Well, if things break down too much, there wont be food to eat and clean water to drink. No amount of "dirty sex" will fix the situation.

Absolute liberty can only be achieved by absolute accountability! It was a cornerstone of the American republic, but now all that has changed, and it's not coming back without absolute rebellion, unfortunatly that's the ebb and flow of republics, and the water is gushing into this one reminiscent of the Titanic in every way!

MGTOW are few in numbers that have the ability to cobble together one man rafts to stay above the waterline! This floundering behemoth is well under way on a voyage to Davy Jones locker!

ARRRRRR!!!!!

Originally Posted by mgtower

Absolute liberty can only be achieved by absolute accountability! ...

Yeah, but only on personal level. Absolute liberty on societal level is a recipe for disaster. Even the simple liberty of voting yourself more and more welfare is enough to bring the collapse, sooner or later.

Originally Posted by rkspsm

But I also agree that in personal/private life, there should be absolute liberty, as long as there is no cost imposed on any unwilling party, be it a person or society. If the act is between two people only, and there is no third, then I dont see it any different from playing a game of chess or a video game or anything, where the imaginations are more important than reality.

I also defend personal freedom and knowledge, not restriction and ignorance.

There is a great lesson I learned from a smart guy on a similar site. He said: just because you are free to do something doesnt mean you have to do it.

This applies to everything, but he was being specific about free speech. Sure, each one is free to say stupid things, but doesnt mean you SHOULD. In fact MGTOWER is right, there must be accountability, you do stupid things you must expect bad results and OWN THEM.

Obviously I have gone "down the drain" and became familiar with very degrading stuff like "Marquis de Sade". I was not caught by it because most of it was against my values, as I am neither a masochist or sadistic.

Should I be free to do those things in private with a willing partner? Yes. But would I want to? No, because I end up understanding what I really wanted in sex and I was not going to get it with degrading acts.

The understanding I have about sex is reflected in a simple question: is the goal of sex selfish pleasure or something else?

It may appear that we seek selfish pleasure, yet we find more pleasure when someone else is involved. And the pleasure is greater when they are willingly involved (except true sadism). That does not make sense if we are selfish.

So, it appears that people use sex to "bond". A sadistic person looks for a masochist, so that they complement each other. It is in essence an act of love...

The way men relate to sex reminds me of a joke:
They asked a millionaire's wife (the cute dumb blond type) if she had married by love or interests. She answer that it must have been love, because she had no interest in her husband...

And so are men, they gain nothing having sex with women. They only open themselves to exploitation.
Women on the other hand have a funcional approach, they always make sure to win something.

So, why do men do it? The bottom line, the sleazy line is: love. Men want love. Women want things.

In this context it doesn't make sense to debase what you love. I have a motorcycle that I love, and I am heartbroken because I just had an accident and it suffered lots of damage. I would NEVER soil, damage or mistreat my bike on purpose, by the contrary, because I love it I want to take care of it.

The motorcycle is not going to love me back. But at least it wont make demands nor take my money against my will...

Originally Posted by Manfred

I also defend personal freedom and knowledge, not restriction and ignorance.

There is a great lesson I learned from a smart guy on a similar site. He said: just because you are free to do something doesnt mean you have to do it.

This applies to everything, but he was being specific about free speech. Sure, each one is free to say stupid things, but doesnt mean you SHOULD. In fact MGTOWER is right, there must be accountability, you do stupid things you must expect bad results and OWN THEM.

Obviously I have gone "down the drain" and became familiar with very degrading stuff like "Marquis de Sade". I was not caught by it because most of it was against my values, as I am neither a masochist or sadistic.

Should I be free to do those things in private with a willing partner? Yes. But would I want to? No, because I end up understanding what I really wanted in sex and I was not going to get it with degrading acts.

The understanding I have about sex is reflected in a simple question: is the goal of sex selfish pleasure or something else?

It may appear that we seek selfish pleasure, yet we find more pleasure when someone else is involved. And the pleasure is greater when they are willingly involved (except true sadism). That does not make sense if we are selfish.

So, it appears that people use sex to "bond". A sadistic person looks for a masochist, so that they complement each other. It is in essence an act of love...

The way men relate to sex reminds me of a joke:
They asked a millionaire's wife (the cute dumb blond type) if she had married by love or interests. She answer that it must have been love, because she had no interest in her husband...

And so are men, they gain nothing having sex with women. They only open themselves to exploitation.
Women on the other hand have a funcional approach, they always make sure to win something.

So, why do men do it? The bottom line, the sleazy line is: love. Men want love. Women want things.

In this context it doesn't make sense to debase what you love. I have a motorcycle that I love, and I am heartbroken because I just had an accident and it suffered lots of damage. I would NEVER soil, damage or mistreat my bike on purpose, by the contrary, because I love it I want to take care of it.

The motorcycle is not going to love me back. But at least it wont make demands nor take my money against my will...

Agreed. But I should point out that all sexual acts if done in presence of someone, is not essentially "private" in a way I mean when I talk about personal liberty. There is still someone else involved, which means there is interaction between humans. And in any interaction, there is no guarantee that both parties are gaining equal benefit, one might be deceiving other. This is true for any interaction, not just sex.

But if its only one person involved, then the dynamics change. Lets say my drawing canvas. I am a digital artist, and yeah sometimes I draw erotic art. If I am not selling them or sharing them, then I dont think whatever I draw is debasing anyone. Its just arrangement of pixels on a screen. My point is, the imagination and/or concept of something, however depraved it is, doesnt convert into something problematic unless and until you start interacting with other people. Free imagination (and not free speech), I think is absolutely necessary for development of society, because it stimulates brain, allows us to think outside the box.

I say this because, sometimes sjws and tradcons both, go too far. They start to insist that "wrong-think" is a crime. I dont agree there is anything which can be called "wrong-think". Its only "different-think". There should be no Overton window when it comes to thinking and imagination, or carrying out any activity where only one person is involved directly or indirectly.

Originally Posted by rkspsm

But I also agree that in personal/private life, there should be absolute liberty, as long as there is no cost imposed on any unwilling party, be it a person or society. If the act is between two people only, and there is no third, then I dont see it any different from playing a game of chess or a video game or anything, where the imaginations are more important than reality.

Agreed, but only up to a point.

What of a situation where one of the parties involved is masochistic to the point of wanting extreme physical harm done to them, like the breaking of bones for example, and the other being sadistic is willing to comply?

Both parties are 'willing to comply', but I for one cannot condone such actions as 'freedom of choice'.