Kissing problem
Pip
I have a bit of a problem that I'm not sure how to handle, my daughter is 7
1/2 and plays a lot with another girl who is 7. The problem is that I keep
catching them kissing quite passionately. When I find them doing this I back
away and call my daughter from out of site for what ever it was I wanted her
for.
This first started last summer I was upstairs and saw them from the window
the other girl L was led on top of my girl A. I made some noise to distract
them and they stopped but then went in the play house and were doing it
there. I made some excuse to split them up and had a word with A about it
( A has slight learning difficulties and has the mental age of a 5/6 yo) I
talked about it as tho it wasn't a problem and she openly told me about it
and said it had been L's idea. I said there was nothing wrong with kissing
but that the way they were kissing is really for grown ups and that I'd
prefer it if they didn't do it, she replied that she really enjoyed doing it
and didn't want to stop.
Then she went through a phase of not playing with L that much but they have
started playing again recently, today I have seen them doing it 3 times.
I really don't know what to do about it, I don't want her to think that it
is dirty or wrong. I don't have a problem that it is a girl she is kissing
like that, it's the fact she is kissing anyone like that, that makes me feel
uncomfortable.
Any advice on this matter would be gratefully appreciated.
Pip.x
Sue Larson
even kissing while playing. Most girls that age I know usually play with
games, listen to music and dance, roller skate, watch movies, etc. Has
another adult shown this girl how to kiss this way? That is the potential
problem right there (if an adult is doing this to this child....is it
leading to something else). I would be tempted to ask to ask your daughter
if she knows where her friend learned to do this and suggest alternate
things to do together and maybe even do these alternate things with them.
Not that there is anything wrong with the kissing like you said, but it
seems like this girl has been exposed greatly to if not involved in this
kind of kissing that she brings it to your house. If they are doing this at
age 7, there will be more to come along.
Susan
"Pip" <som...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:0cdef37783f80f09...@news.bubbanews.com...
Pip
"Sue Larson" <suel...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:we6dnQbCKqq...@comcast.com...
> You know, I can't help but wonder where that girl ever got the notion of
> even kissing while playing. Most girls that age I know usually play with
> games, listen to music and dance, roller skate, watch movies, etc. Has
> another adult shown this girl how to kiss this way? That is the potential
> problem right there (if an adult is doing this to this child....is it
> leading to something else). I would be tempted to ask to ask your daughter
> if she knows where her friend learned to do this and suggest alternate
> things to do together and maybe even do these alternate things with them.
> Not that there is anything wrong with the kissing like you said, but it
> seems like this girl has been exposed greatly to if not involved in this
> kind of kissing that she brings it to your house. If they are doing this
at
> age 7, there will be more to come along.
> Susan
When I first saw what was going on that was my first thought as well Susan,
I live in a little cul de sac with only 8 houses and this little girl lives
across the road.
I have never heard anything bad about the family and the grandmother lives
next door to them. L is a joy to be around and very polite well adjusted etc
so I don't think it is abuse, from what A has been saying to me tonight
(talked with her again about it) I think L has been watching her parents
making love at night.
I have told A again that only grown ups should be kissing like that and
asked her not to do it. I have thought about going over to L's house and
speaking to her parents but I am to embarrassed to I don't want them to
think I'm blaming L for it and really couldn't face a confrontation.
Sue Larson
> making love at night.
You NEVER said you lived next door to STEVE!!!!!!! (just kidding....)
If that is the case, then maybe you should simply tell your daughter that
when her friend is over, they should be playing games and not engaging in
their kissing act. No, there is absolutely nothing wrong with it, but it is
more appropriate to engage in that kissing later on. In the meantime, there
is nothing wrong with kissing each other goodbye each time they leave (on
the cheek or lips) but none of the other stuff you mentioned.
I'm not sure this is the right answer. I know my five year old will hug and
kiss her friends but not to the extent you described. I absolutely envision
telling my daughter that it was not appropriate if she did otherwise. And, I
do agree with you that you should not confront the other parents. I think
you need to handle it from within your own family, namely, your daughter, so
that next time, she tells her friend (No, let's not do that...let's do
something else instead.)
Susan
"Pip" <som...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:2ddb6875b414c5ef...@news.bubbanews.com...
> (talked with her again about it) > I have told A again that only grown ups
dragonlady
"Pip" <som...@nowhere.com> wrote:
My gut reaction is to wonder if L is being molested. Children who are
will frequently "replay" what is happening to them by doing the same
things to other children. It isn't that they're kissing, so much, as
your description of L being on top of A, and the fact that she doesn't
do this in front of you, but only when they don't know you are watching
-- a sign that she knows there's something wrong.
As I said, it is a gut response, based on nothing but what you've
posted. However, I think I'd want to mention what I saw to L's parents,
and also tell them that you'd heard it COULD be a sign of a child who
has been subjected to some inappropriate touching by some adult or
teenager in their lives.
I'd just stay close when she's playing with your daughter, so they don't
have an opportunity to play like this. It's hard, but doable.
meh
--
Children won't care how much you know until they know how much you care
R. Steve Walz
Leave them the fuck alone, you're the one who's twisted.
Steve
R. Steve Walz
>
> You know, I can't help but wonder where that girl ever got the notion of
> even kissing while playing. Most girls that age I know usually play with
> games, listen to music and dance, roller skate, watch movies, etc. Has
> another adult shown this girl how to kiss this way? That is the potential
> problem right there (if an adult is doing this to this child....is it
> leading to something else). I would be tempted to ask to ask your daughter
> if she knows where her friend learned to do this and suggest alternate
> things to do together and maybe even do these alternate things with them.
> Not that there is anything wrong with the kissing like you said, but it
> seems like this girl has been exposed greatly to if not involved in this
> kind of kissing that she brings it to your house. If they are doing this at
> age 7, there will be more to come along.
> Susan
Yeah, gee, by age 12 or so they'll be mastubating with vegetables!
Seems right on schedule to me!
Steve
R. Steve Walz
Oh god fucking jesus' shit on a stick, just fucking stop, you Americans
are so fucking insane about sex that you make me sick. Kids all over
the world do that, and you're being stupid. Leave them the fuck alone!
Steve
R. Steve Walz
>
> I think L has been watching her parents
> > making love at night.
>
> You NEVER said you lived next door to STEVE!!!!!!! (just kidding....)
>
> If that is the case, then maybe you should simply tell your daughter that
> when her friend is over, they should be playing games and not engaging in
> their kissing act. No, there is absolutely nothing wrong with it, but it is
> more appropriate to engage in that kissing later on. In the meantime, there
> is nothing wrong with kissing each other goodbye each time they leave (on
> the cheek or lips) but none of the other stuff you mentioned.
> I'm not sure this is the right answer. I know my five year old will hug and
> kiss her friends but not to the extent you described. I absolutely envision
> telling my daughter that it was not appropriate if she did otherwise. And, I
> do agree with you that you should not confront the other parents. I think
> you need to handle it from within your own family, namely, your daughter, so
> that next time, she tells her friend (No, let's not do that...let's do
> something else instead.)
>
> Susan
Oh stop, you people are so fucking sexually sick! Leave kids the fuck
alone, why are you trying to monitor their kissing, how sick and vicious
you are, all they are doing is doing what feels good spontaneously,
and YOU can't handle it because of your superstitions and sexual guilt
and shame and your looking for some SICK reason to stop it, and your
SICKNESS IS ALL YOUR OWN!! Leave them the fuck alone, for GOD's sake!
Steve
R. Steve Walz
Nonsense, this is typical for kids, how stupid can you get!!??!
This is kids imitating adults, they see it all over even without TV.
Only in American culture do sexually frightened morons panic and
assume is must be "ACTING OUT THEIR MOLESTATION"!!!!
Steve
Alina
As far as I know, many kids will sooner or later explore aspects of
their own sexuality and then leave it alone, it is quite normal,
chances are your girl will loose interest in kissing after a while.
Yes, they are imitating, but as they are really not adults, there is
nothing much to it for them.
However you are giving her the wrong message: "There's nothing wrong
with kissing BUT..." If there is nothing wrong, then WHY is it
bothering mommy? Why does she call me apart when she talks about it?
There is something here that mommy doesn't want to say.
You are saying there is nothing wrong but all your actions indicate
the contrary. Thus, you are creating a taboo and poking on her morbid
curiosity, and actually encouraging her to continue kissing.
I don't know that much, so ingonre all this if you please, but I think
the best way to stop that behaviour is to actually IGNORE it and let
it wear off.
Plus ... there really is nothing wrong about it, is there?
"Pip" <som...@nowhere.com> wrote in message news:<0cdef37783f80f09...@news.bubbanews.com>...
R. Steve Walz
>
> I say let it be.
>
> As far as I know, many kids will sooner or later explore aspects of
> their own sexuality and then leave it alone, it is quite normal,
> chances are your girl will loose interest in kissing after a while.
> Yes, they are imitating, but as they are really not adults, there is
> nothing much to it for them.
>
> However you are giving her the wrong message: "There's nothing wrong
> with kissing BUT..." If there is nothing wrong, then WHY is it
> bothering mommy? Why does she call me apart when she talks about it?
> There is something here that mommy doesn't want to say.
>
> You are saying there is nothing wrong but all your actions indicate
> the contrary. Thus, you are creating a taboo and poking on her morbid
> curiosity, and actually encouraging her to continue kissing.
>
> I don't know that much, so ingonre all this if you please, but I think
> the best way to stop that behaviour is to actually IGNORE it and let
> it wear off.
>
> Plus ... there really is nothing wrong about it, is there?
Nope. And it doesn't wear off, it grows into normal sexuality at
about a linear rate as early puberty hits, which is why the vicious
antisexual bigots in this society soon try to suppress it again
even if they first had the good sense to leave it alone, and even
if only because of their own sick embarrassment.
If you let kids do it they will indeed be involved in frenching,
mutual masturbation, sleep-over oral homosex, and other such quite
normal human fun which is ignored in MOST places in the world
other than in stupid fucking Xtian antisexual bigot society.
In most non-western places this is considered quite harmless
and even cute.
Steve
Doug Kanter
daughter was the same age as my son. When they were both 4, this family
thought it was OK to let their daughter watch "Jurassic Park". Then, they
wondered why she couldn't sleep for a week and refused to go into her own
closet for clothes. Perhaps your daughter's playmate is being exposed to
age-inappropriate television at home. Have you met the parents? If they seem
clueless, ask if the girl is ever with another guardian (relative or
babysitter).
At the very least, this girl could come from a family which gets all its
ideas from television. That's child abuse, but nobody believes me.
Doug Kanter
> but I am to embarrassed to I don't want them to
> think I'm blaming L for it and really couldn't face a confrontation.
In that case, you have not earned your full certification as a parent, and
you're barely ready for the adolescent years ahead. I don't know if
confrontation is the right word, but you need to talk to them. Always
remember that at least 50% of parents are clueless dolts who will let their
kids watch inappropriate things on TV, or leave unlocked guns on the coffee
table. There's no sin going on here, but still, it would be a good idea to
know what kind of parents you're dealing with. Or, you could wait until both
girls are 15 and see what parental negligence holds in store.
Doug Kanter
news:b67011a8.04030...@posting.google.com...
> I say let it be.
>
> As far as I know, many kids will sooner or later explore aspects of
> their own sexuality and then leave it alone, it is quite normal,
> chances are your girl will loose interest in kissing after a while.
> Yes, they are imitating, but as they are really not adults, there is
> nothing much to it for them.
>
> However you are giving her the wrong message: "There's nothing wrong
> with kissing BUT..." If there is nothing wrong, then WHY is it
> bothering mommy? Why does she call me apart when she talks about it?
> There is something here that mommy doesn't want to say.
>
> You are saying there is nothing wrong but all your actions indicate
> the contrary. Thus, you are creating a taboo and poking on her morbid
> curiosity, and actually encouraging her to continue kissing.
>
> I don't know that much, so ingonre all this if you please, but I think
> the best way to stop that behaviour is to actually IGNORE it and let
> it wear off.
>
> Plus ... there really is nothing wrong about it, is there?
>
OK, but she should still get to know the parents, which is a good idea any
time your kids are spending lots of time with the same bunch of playmates.
R. Steve Walz
Being scared of closets and coming to grips with it is a normal part
of development. This happens whether from kids scaring each other,
or adult fiction books, or from other modern media, and it SHOULD!
There is NO "age-inappropriate" material anywhere. That's garbage.
Steve
Doug Kanter
news:405124...@armory.com...
So, it's OK for toddlers to watch a movie like "9-1/2 Weeks"? Is that what
you're saying?
--
Do not respond to my Hotmail address. It's never checked. Post all responses
here.
Alina
As for age-inappropiate TV, I don't know. I guess it's not that easy
to draw the line between what is and is not advisable for a child to
see on TV, and after all it will vary a lot from one family to
another. However this kissing girl might have seen kisses just
anywhere, and I very much doubt it is inappropiate to see a kiss (but
that's just me - my only daughter is just 4m old so I will think this
over again when MY time comes). I do think that there are many things
that a child CAN see on TV or by other means, provided the parents can
help him/her handle the emotions and questions afterwards.
What you call child abuse in this case, I call a poor feedback, poor
management of the child's learning, neglecting the child, or even TV
abuse.
"Doug Kanter" <ancien...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<BI%3c.2190$k%5....@news02.roc.ny>...
Doug Kanter
you can come up with a list of movies which would be nearly impossible to
explain to a little kid who was sitting next to you on the couch. How about
these:
Fight Club
Secretary
Saving Private Ryan (the first 10 minutes)
Henry & June
9-1/2 Weeks
--
Do not respond to my Hotmail address. It's never checked. Post all responses
here.
......
"Alina" <al...@et.com.mx> wrote in message
news:b67011a8.04031...@posting.google.com...
Jacques Michel
More people believe you than you think. I, for example, have no TV.
Jacques Michel
I forgot to say: even if I have no TV, I actually showed "Jurassic
park" to my children when they were 5 or 6. Not the most violent
parts, just an excerpt with dinosaurs strolling. The childs new the
dinosaurs were extincts, this was an exercise to show them that movies
are not real, even if they look it. I don't think that's abuse, is it?
;-)
Alina
> Of course it's OK to see kissing on TV. But, think SERIOUSLY for a while and
> you can come up with a list of movies which would be nearly impossible to
> explain to a little kid who was sitting next to you on the couch. How about
> these:
>
> Fight Club
> Secretary
> Saving Private Ryan (the first 10 minutes)
> Henry & June
> 9-1/2 Weeks
>
Like I said, that will vary a lot from one parent's point of view to
the next. You can't draw the line and expect everybody to agree. Of
course there are things I would not want (and will not let) my own kid
to watch. What I tried to say was there is a lot of things that,
rather from preventing children from watching, it may be best to allow
(not encourage, just allow) it, and afterwards help them handle it. By
strictly forbidding you create taboos and what you might get is
children still watching forbidden movies behind your back and not
being able to come to you for help when they are scared or intrigued
or whatever.
9-1/2 weeks... well, it is my own personal opinion that lousy movies
are inaproppiate for any age :-)
About the kissing, you have said it's OK for kids to see kisses. How
did you connect the kissing girl with all this TV stuff?
Alina.
Doug Kanter
Alina:
You're right when you say it may be possible to some parents to explain
almost ANY movie to a kid of ANY age. But, there are also parents who let
kids watch most anything, totally unsupervised. I have experience with this
issue and it's just plain wrong.
As far as the connection between girls kissing and TV, it's a certain amount
of conjecture on my part. Lots of women, and men in some cultures do that
fake cheek kiss thing as a greeting. But, it's not often that Aunt Millie
stops by with cookies and climbs on top of mommy for 15 minutes as a form of
greeting.
:-) Kids see it SOMEPLACE, right?
I'm not a prude about this. It's good for kids to see affection. But the
original question here came from a person who is uncomfortable with the
situation. As respondents, it matters little what we think is "too much".
The mother's looking for a way to deal with this. Period.
Doug Kanter
news:5e2ca8a5.04031...@posting.google.com...
It depends on the kids. If yours handled it well, that's fine! Lately, my
son has insisted on seeing every Dirty Harry movie ever made. That's led to
discussions of the inaccuracies of the movies, in terms of the guns, and the
racial and political climate portrayed in the movies. But, some parents
don't supervise.
R. Steve Walz
It would be, if they wanted to. They don't. Such stuff holds no
interest for them. Nature prevents theirinterest before suitability
exists. Same with sex. IF they want it, they should have it, but
before they do, you couldn't give it to them as a gift!!
Steve
Jacques Michel
You did not read why I wrote, did you? I said I only showed a
non-violent excerpt. Maybe my attempt at humour got unnoticed. And why
could a five years old not handle the fact that movies are not real?
Alina
> But, there are also parents who let
> kids watch most anything, totally unsupervised. I have experience with this
> issue and it's just plain wrong.
Agreed. That's what you call child abuse, I call TV abuse AND
neglecting your child.
> :-) Kids see it SOMEPLACE, right?
Right.
> I'm not a prude about this. It's good for kids to see affection. But the
> original question here came from a person who is uncomfortable with the
> situation. As respondents, it matters little what we think is "too much".
> The mother's looking for a way to deal with this. Period.
And I hope she's found it. Meeting the playmate's parents will help
Pip at least get a better idea of what she's dealing with.
Alina.
R. Steve Walz
Mine always did, we always talked about how movies are made.
Steve
Doug Kanter
> > I'm not a prude about this. It's good for kids to see affection. But the
> > original question here came from a person who is uncomfortable with the
> > situation. As respondents, it matters little what we think is "too
much".
> > The mother's looking for a way to deal with this. Period.
>
> And I hope she's found it. Meeting the playmate's parents will help
> Pip at least get a better idea of what she's dealing with.
>
> Alina.
I find it odd how some parents can't be direct with people who may affect
their kids. There's a way to be assertive about the need for information,
while graciously stopping just shy of accusing someone of something.
Personally, I admire mother bears. You look at their cubs funny and they
remove your face. Or an arm or two. :-)
Doug Kanter
I read what you wrote, and I agreed, in an indirect way. Supervised, some
movies become OK for kids.
Even so, I believe there are some things that little kids don't need to see,
no matter how much an adult tells them it's not real. That's why it's called
"early childhood", Jacques. Have you seen "Saving Private Ryan"? Can you
think of any reason why a 4 year old needs to see the first 15 minutes of
that movie?
Jacques Michel
[...]
> Even so, I believe there are some things that little kids don't need to see,
> no matter how much an adult tells them it's not real. That's why it's called
> "early childhood", Jacques. Have you seen "Saving Private Ryan"? Can you
> think of any reason why a 4 year old needs to see the first 15 minutes of
> that movie?
Yes, I agree to that. It is the reason why I did not show them the
whole of "Jurassic Park", only an excerpt to prove my point. And no, I
did not show them "Saving Private Ryan" either.
Jacques Michel
> Jacques Michel wrote:
> >
(snip)
> > And why
> > could a five years old not handle the fact that movies are not real?
> -------------
> Mine always did, we always talked about how movies are made.
> Steve
Good. I think it is, maybe unfortunately, a necessary part of basic
eduction in this present day and place to teach children that movies
are not real. I even used our video camera to show them some simple
tricks (like making a person disappear), that proved to interest them
a lot.
Of course, video cameras did not exist when your children were 4, but
maybe for your grandchildren?
R. Steve Walz
Sure, but it isn't rocket-surgery to explain the process, and it also
teaches them how to pull themselves out of a drama and look at it from
a vantage point, an important human reasoning trick!
Steve
greccogirl
behavior does usually come from girls who are being molested by an adult
or an older child.
dragonlady wrote:
>In article <0cdef37783f80f09...@news.bubbanews.com>,
> "Pip" <som...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>My gut reaction is to wonder if L is being molested. Children who are
>will frequently "replay" what is happening to them by doing the same
>things to other children. It isn't that they're kissing, so much, as
>your description of L being on top of A, and the fact that she doesn't
>do this in front of you, but only when they don't know you are watching
>-- a sign that she knows there's something wrong.
>
>As I said, it is a gut response, based on nothing but what you've
>posted. However, I think I'd want to mention what I saw to L's parents,
>and also tell them that you'd heard it COULD be a sign of a child who
>has been subjected to some inappropriate touching by some adult or
>teenager in their lives.
>
>I'd just stay close when she's playing with your daughter, so they don't
>have an opportunity to play like this. It's hard, but doable.
>
>meh
>
>
R. Steve Walz
>
> That was my first thought. Experts will tell you that this kind of
> behavior does usually come from girls who are being molested by an adult
> or an older child.
Or young lesbians, OR third world people's where physical affection
is still legal for children! Places where children aren't sexually
infantilized as they are here.
Steve
Top Spin
wrote:
>That was my first thought. Experts will tell you that this kind of
>behavior does usually come from girls who are being molested by an adult
>or an older child.
No, no, no. The data shows that children who have been molested are
more likely to exhibit sexualized behaviors beyond their years. It's a
correlation, not a cause. It's like saying "all dogs have hair". This
does not mean that if something has hair, it is a dog.
Many serious mistakes have been made by parents, police, therapists,
the courts, and child protective agencies by jumping from the
observations of sexualized behavior in a child and child abuse.
There may be child abuse going on and it makes sense to check it out,
but is it by no means certain. In fact, it is probably unlikely.
--
For email, use Usenet-20031220 at spamex.com
Sue Larson
> is still legal for children! Places where children aren't sexually
> infantilized as they are here.
> Steve
your wife have sex and whatever else you all did (and I'm sure that helped
lead them to want to recreate your actions). I do not know of any 11 year
old girl (other than your daughter) who wanted to have sex with a boy unless
they were exposed to it somehow (or they weren't getting enough attention at
home/ father wa out of the picture, etc). Girls do not really enjoy sex that
young because they are too [physically/anatomically]young and boys that age
don't know what they are doing (because perhaps it is not time for them to
be doing it yet!). And, if you tell me your daughter enjoyed it because you
could hear her "carrying on", it was only because she heard you and your
wife "carrying on" during your own escapades! Kids copy what they see and
hear. Now we are talking about seven year olds. Most seven year olds can't
even fathom kissing the opposite sex and it's not because they were told not
to (they see their parents kiss all the time). It is a normal stage of
development, and in a few years, this turns around to where they can't keep
their hands off each other. Where do you see the diffence between someone
who loves to have alot of sex, and someone who is a "sex addict" (someone
who, for psychological reasons, uses sex as an out, as an alcoholic would
use alcohol). Those who are sex addicts most likely were sexually abused
when they were younger. Abused because they didn't want to do whatever was
happening to them, or it caused them confusion because they were too young.
I don't know if an 11 year old could even detect if he/she was a lesbian. I
don't think children are sexually infantilized here (however, I could concur
with you when the kids became teenagers and parents forbid them to engage in
sex. That's where the problems begin). Since you are so open about this, I
am interested in knowing if there was any sexual experiences that you had
with family members while you were young (as a normal occurrence or
otherwise). You just seem to lump everyone who doesn't have sex by the time
they come out of the womb sexual misfits!
Susan
"R. Steve Walz" <rst...@armory.com> wrote in message
news:406622...@armory.com...
> greccogirl wrote:
> >
> > That was my first thought. Experts will tell you that this kind of
> > behavior does usually come from girls who are being molested by an adult
> > or an older child.
> -----------------------
>
>
R. Steve Walz
>
> > Or young lesbians, OR third world people's where physical affection
> > is still legal for children! Places where children aren't sexually
> > infantilized as they are here.
> > Steve
>
> You know, Steve, children learn what they live. Your kids watched you and
> your wife have sex and whatever else you all did (and I'm sure that helped
> lead them to want to recreate your actions).
Nope, that would be bullying children. They didn't want a bit of
sex for themselves till they hit puberty, then they wanted to
fuck all their friends. Why? It felt good.
> I do not know of any 11 year
> old girl (other than your daughter) who wanted to have sex with a boy unless
> they were exposed to it somehow (or they weren't getting enough attention at
> home/ father wa out of the picture, etc).
-------------------
I know from MY experience as a child that girls 7 or 8 masturbate
to orgasm, and want boys to touch them and lick them if they can
obtain it without danger of parents finding out. I know from my
wife and many other women we shared sex with that young girls are
indeed masturbating and are orgasmic from age 5 or so.
So you're lying about 11 year old girls. The notion that a girl has
to be abused before she then quite pathologically wants sex is a
truly insipid sick notion only promoted by fundy antisexuals and
sexually shamed wannabe social-worker types. While abuse acting-out
is a real phenomenon, it is over-cited and mis-indentified as
compared to what is actually very normal sexual interest, interest
that is all too recently in this culture quite wrongly labeled as
pathological, when even other white people in Europe would laugh
at you for believing such a profoundly backward stupidity.
I have talked to countless women we had sex with as a group over
thirty years and asked them what they REALLY wanted as soon as
they became attracted to boys, and they universally wanted to
get fucked, they just felt that they had no chances to do it
and get away with it. Many of them participated quite heartily
in sexual explorations with siblings and friends, and they all
wished they could have done MUCH more.
> Girls do not really enjoy sex that
> young because they are too [physically/anatomically]young and boys that age
> don't know what they are doing
------------------------
That is only because this culture mis-informs children, and
shames and infantilizes them about sexual exploration.
> (because perhaps it is not time for them to
> be doing it yet!).
-------------------
Nonsense, kids in other cultures engage in oral sex at age 8-12.
In most places oral sex is not even considered to be "sex".
It is ignored or smiled at.
> And, if you tell me your daughter enjoyed it because you
> could hear her "carrying on", it was only because she heard you and your
> wife "carrying on" during your own escapades! Kids copy what they see and
> hear.
----------------------
While you see this as some artificial monkey-see monkey-do imitation,
they didn't do that before puberty, and imitation is in fact the way
humans learn to do things correctly.
> Now we are talking about seven year olds. Most seven year olds can't
> even fathom kissing the opposite sex and it's not because they were told not
> to (they see their parents kiss all the time).
-------------------------
In other cultures where children see sex and nudity, they DO kiss
and feel no shame about it, nor do they feel this characteristic
other-sex-hating, a truly WEIRD phenomenon which they are taught
in this society by the way it shames people for any closeness like
sexuality. Boy-hating and girl-hating are NOT normal for kids in
all cultures, they are ONLY found in shaming antisexual cultures.
> It is a normal stage of
> development, and in a few years, this turns around to where they can't keep
> their hands off each other.
----------------
No, many anthropologists have written theses about the distinct
differences in the behavior of children in the west and in the
third world. This thing you imagine is "normal" is actually a
social pathology.
> Where do you see the diffence between someone
> who loves to have alot of sex, and someone who is a "sex addict" (someone
> who, for psychological reasons, uses sex as an out, as an alcoholic would
> use alcohol). Those who are sex addicts most likely were sexually abused
> when they were younger. Abused because they didn't want to do whatever was
> happening to them, or it caused them confusion because they were too young.
---------------------
Sex addicts, as all addicts, are overdoing something to try to treat
a problem in them, and if you find that you rub it till you get sores,
and you can't orgasm enough to make you snore, then you have a problem,
but otherwise it's not an addiction. Notably, people in sexually
liberal cultures have no sexual addiction either, and very low
alcoholism and other addictions.
> I don't know if an 11 year old could even detect if he/she was a lesbian.
-----------------------
Only in sexually restrictive backward cultures are there such things
as people who identify as strictly one or the other. The more sexually
liberal cultures don't bother to identify people, but more importantly,
people IN those cultures also don't feel the need to limit themselves
to just one or the other, and they are more willing to simply do
whatever they happen to fancy at the moment to achieve orgasm or to
pleasure a friend. The Big Secret: There are NO such things as just
gays or just straights. Humans are actually bisexual, or really more
accurately they are Try-Sexual, they'll try just about anything! And
no, that's not merely some joke, we are the only species that uses
objects and other species in our sexual play.
> I
> don't think children are sexually infantilized here (however, I could concur
> with you when the kids became teenagers and parents forbid them to engage in
> sex. That's where the problems begin).
-------------------
Nope, the shaming begins by them not seeing sex as everyday and normal
for everyone.
> Since you are so open about this, I
> am interested in knowing if there was any sexual experiences that you had
> with family members while you were young (as a normal occurrence or
> otherwise).
--------------
Other than a little with siblings, no, but with friends, a lot.
> You just seem to lump everyone who doesn't have sex by the time
> they come out of the womb sexual misfits!
>
> Susan
-----------------------------------
Kids who don't see sex as often as older people do it and who don't
see it from their first awareness onward, are HARMED.
I experienced sexual exploration with a bunch of kids ranging from
three years older than me to three years younger starting when I
was eleven. Since we had no condoms we engaged in group mutual
manual and oral sex, and the younger girls were just as horny as
the older ones, I being one of only two boys in a group of seven
of us. The younger girls got nearly as lubricated and came just as
hard if not harder than the older girls, and could do it more often.
We carried this on in family rec-rooms, and in homemade camps in
our semi-rural 800 acre forest across the road for over three years,
spring, summer, and fall, and even a few winter episodes.
Steve
Sue Larson
> > am interested in knowing if there was any sexual experiences that you
had
> > with family members while you were young (as a normal occurrence or
> > otherwise).
> --------------
> Other than a little with siblings, no, but with friends, a lot.
I suspect you started within your family [siblings] and branched out.
> I experienced sexual exploration with a bunch of kids ranging from
> three years older than me to three years younger starting when I
> was eleven.
...when you were eleven. The original poster said that his daughter was
starting this when she was seven. You were hitting puberty at age eleven and
naturally acting upon your desires. This girl is only seven and cannot
fathom those desires yet unless someone teaches it to her (most likely).
Most seven year olds can't
> > even fathom kissing the opposite sex and it's not because they were told
not
> > to (they see their parents kiss all the time).
> -------------------------
> In other cultures where children see sex and nudity, they DO kiss
> and feel no shame about it, nor do they feel this characteristic
> other-sex-hating, a truly WEIRD phenomenon which they are taught
> in this society by the way it shames people for any closeness like
> sexuality. Boy-hating and girl-hating are NOT normal for kids in
> all cultures, they are ONLY found in shaming antisexual cultures.
>
I don't know about this. My nine year old daughter will tell me every so
often that she likes a boy in her school and our conversation usually goes
into what is so cool about that person, and when I happen to see the boy at
school, I always tell her "you're right...he is a cool dude" or "he's pretty
cute."
But she has never expressed a desire to kiss the boy, AND she has seen
plenty of physical affection between my husband and I. (Interesting that she
watches us and always smiles, but I know that is because it makes her feel
so secure to see her parents loving towards each other.) But that doesn't
mean that she has the desire to go out and do it yet, but at the same time,
she will be coming of age soon, is probably already thinking about it, and
may want to start experiencing these things for herself. But she never had
those desires at age seven, I can tell you that. And, it seems like you
never acted on those desires until you got to age eleven. However, you can
throw in your experiences with family members at an earlier age, and that is
where the the seed was planted for you.
In some ways I can see your point but in other ways, I still see it as
pushing it on to these kids too early and before they can handle it. But
that is just a matter of opinion.
> We carried this on in family rec-rooms, and in homemade camps in
> our semi-rural 800 acre forest across the road for over three years,
> spring, summer, and fall, and even a few winter episodes.
I'm just curious.. did ALL the parents know this was going on when it was
(did they watch or did they just know it was going on), or was it just a
time for you and your friends to hang out together and this is what you did?
Susan
"R. Steve Walz" <rst...@armory.com> wrote in message
news:4067A2...@armory.com...
> > You just seem to lump everyone who doesn't have sex by the time
> > they come out of the womb sexual misfits!
> >
> > Susan
> -----------------------------------
> Kids who don't see sex as often as older people do it and who don't
> see it from their first awareness onward, are HARMED.
>
Since we had no condoms we engaged in group mutual
> manual and oral sex, and the younger girls were just as horny as
> the older ones, I being one of only two boys in a group of seven
> of us. The younger girls got nearly as lubricated and came just as
> hard if not harder than the older girls, and could do it more often.
>
> Steve
R. Steve Walz
>
> > > Since you are so open about this, I
> > > am interested in knowing if there was any sexual experiences that you
> had
> > > with family members while you were young (as a normal occurrence or
> > > otherwise).
> > --------------
> > Other than a little with siblings, no, but with friends, a lot.
>
> I suspect you started within your family [siblings] and branched out.
Why wouldn't my friends be "starting" and my family be branching out?
It IS "incest" supposedly, doesn't that label titillate you?
> > I experienced sexual exploration with a bunch of kids ranging from
> > three years older than me to three years younger starting when I
> > was eleven.
>
> ...when you were eleven. The original poster said that his daughter was
> starting this when she was seven. You were hitting puberty at age eleven and
> naturally acting upon your desires. This girl is only seven and cannot
> fathom those desires yet unless someone teaches it to her (most likely).
--------------------------
One of my young partners was 7 for just another week when we started,
and she was one of the horniest girls I ever knew. She wasn't abused,
she lived with her mother and younger brother, and her mother had
no men friends, and they had no grandparents, I remember, they had
been much older and died.
My wife admitted to masturbating since age 5 and craving sexual
exploration, especially with men/boys by age 8.
> Most seven year olds can't
> > > even fathom kissing the opposite sex and it's not because they were told
> not
> > > to (they see their parents kiss all the time).
> > -------------------------
> > In other cultures where children see sex and nudity, they DO kiss
> > and feel no shame about it, nor do they feel this characteristic
> > other-sex-hating, a truly WEIRD phenomenon which they are taught
> > in this society by the way it shames people for any closeness like
> > sexuality. Boy-hating and girl-hating are NOT normal for kids in
> > all cultures, they are ONLY found in shaming antisexual cultures.
>
> I don't know about this. My nine year old daughter will tell me every so
> often that she likes a boy in her school and our conversation usually goes
> into what is so cool about that person, and when I happen to see the boy at
> school, I always tell her "you're right...he is a cool dude" or "he's pretty
> cute."
--------------------
And so what is it that you imagine she means, if this isn't sexual???
Why would she bother?
> But she has never expressed a desire to kiss the boy, AND she has seen
> plenty of physical affection between my husband and I.
---------------------
But she has been successfully shamed by your expectations for her and
what you have not provided for her, and by society. Why would she
tell you such a thing, she knows better!
> (Interesting that she
> watches us and always smiles, but I know that is because it makes her feel
> so secure to see her parents loving towards each other.)
--------------------
My wife said seeing her parents fooling around always made her wet.
> But that doesn't
> mean that she has the desire to go out and do it yet,
-------------------
Nonsense, this is your stupidity speaking. Everyone WANTS precisely
what they fantasize about, nothing less!
> but at the same time,
> she will be coming of age soon, is probably already thinking about it, and
> may want to start experiencing these things for herself. But she never had
> those desires at age seven, I can tell you that. And, it seems like you
> never acted on those desires until you got to age eleven. However, you can
> throw in your experiences with family members at an earlier age, and that is
> where the the seed was planted for you.
--------------------------
Boys are usually later than girls, the operation of a penile erectile
function and stimulation is delayed over the simpler female erectile
function.
> In some ways I can see your point but in other ways, I still see it as
> pushing it on to these kids too early and before they can handle it. But
> that is just a matter of opinion.
----------------------------
If you make it available, you're not pushing it.
If you tell a kid they can have sex in their room if they want,
then they know that into the future. They know that you are safe
about it, both to talk to, and not to interfere with their life.
> > We carried this on in family rec-rooms, and in homemade camps in
> > our semi-rural 800 acre forest across the road for over three years,
> > spring, summer, and fall, and even a few winter episodes.
>
> I'm just curious.. did ALL the parents know this was going on when it was
> (did they watch or did they just know it was going on), or was it just a
> time for you and your friends to hang out together and this is what you did?
>
> Susan
----------------------
No, this was entirely unbeknownst to our parents. My parents would
have probably told me it was alright, but warned me that other parents
would become insane about it, and they'd have been right. We were
actually well-protected from adult scrutiny MOSTLY because they
didn't think us kids would ever be unashamed enough to play sexually
in a group, and that they didn't think that we were even sexually
interested yet. Boy were THEY wrong!!
Steve
Jacques Michel
(many snips)
> I know from MY experience as a child that girls 7 or 8 masturbate
> to orgasm, and want boys to touch them and lick them if they can
> obtain it without danger of parents finding out. I know from my
> wife and many other women we shared sex with that young girls are
> indeed masturbating and are orgasmic from age 5 or so.
>
> So you're lying about 11 year old girls. The notion that a girl has
> to be abused before she then quite pathologically wants sex is a
> truly insipid sick notion only promoted by fundy antisexuals and
> sexually shamed wannabe social-worker types. While abuse acting-out
> is a real phenomenon, it is over-cited and mis-indentified as
> compared to what is actually very normal sexual interest, interest
> that is all too recently in this culture quite wrongly labeled as
> pathological, when even other white people in Europe would laugh
> at you for believing such a profoundly backward stupidity.
>
> I have talked to countless women we had sex with as a group over
> thirty years and asked them what they REALLY wanted as soon as
> they became attracted to boys, and they universally wanted to
> get fucked, they just felt that they had no chances to do it
> and get away with it. Many of them participated quite heartily
> in sexual explorations with siblings and friends, and they all
> wished they could have done MUCH more.
>
> I experienced sexual exploration with a bunch of kids ranging from
> three years older than me to three years younger starting when I
> was eleven. Since we had no condoms we engaged in group mutual
> manual and oral sex, and the younger girls were just as horny as
> the older ones, I being one of only two boys in a group of seven
> of us. The younger girls got nearly as lubricated and came just as
> hard if not harder than the older girls, and could do it more often.
>
I have a hard time believing you. Quite simply because whatever
experience I have about children or experiences I had as a child are
in contradiction with what you say.
I remember quite well when I was 11. Indeed, we boys ans girls could
have tried it whithout our parents knowing. But we didn't. Even when
one of the boys (who was probably a bit more advanced than I was)
started to get interested, the girls turned him down.
I also have contacts with 7 and 11 years olds today (mine and their
friends). Quite frankly, your description of children and what I see
give me the impression that we must live on different planets.
Now, I am willing to make the hypothesis that your experience at 11 is
indeed as you wrote. The question then becomes: how come you met
people having such sexual experiences all your life (apparently) while
the world around me looks so different? I'm sorry, I can't explain
that.
Anyway, now we know about your experiences as a kid. Did similar
experiences also happen with your children and other children living
in your community? Did all kids enjoy it? What happened when they grew
to adults: did they choose a more monogamic lifestyle or not?
Your community was in the 70s. Are there any communities that still
live this way? Do they have some information on-line? Can they be
visited?
Sue Larson
> live this way? Do they have some information on-line? Can they be
> visited?
Absolutely, but it takes place at Steve's place and his partners' homes. If
you are interested, I suggested you be a little more open to what he has to
say, and be nicer to him (if you want a little piece of all of them, that
is....)
Susan
"Jacques Michel" <jak...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5e2ca8a5.04033...@posting.google.com...
Sue Larson
> It IS "incest" supposedly, doesn't that label titillate you?
More than you can possibly imagine.
> And so what is it that you imagine she means, if this isn't sexual???
> Why would she bother?
>
Of course, she is beginning to take notice of boys in a different way than
she has before, but it will be of her own time. Shall I go ahead and buy her
a box of condoms every time she points out a good looking kid?
But she has been successfully shamed by your expectations for her and
> what you have not provided for her, and by society. Why would she
> tell you such a thing, she knows better!
You couldn't be more wrong. If I sat around the house making points ten
times a day about sex and the human being, she probably would jump further
ahead. What would my point be to do that though? To expose her earlier so
she can get a head start, probably. That, in my view, is called
manipulation. My daughter knows alot about sex and everything that goes
along with it, plus knows a whole lot more than alot of her friends (whose
parents insist on telling them that sex means kissing). When she is ready,
she will know it, and that is her decision and not my place to manipulate.
> Nonsense, this is your stupidity speaking. Everyone WANTS precisely
> what they fantasize about, nothing less!
Thank you, sir.
If you make it available, you're not pushing it.
> If you tell a kid they can have sex in their room if they want,
> then they know that into the future. They know that you are safe
> about it, both to talk to, and not to interfere with their life.
It IS available to her. She has asked me multiple questions already (and she
has plenty of reading material, too). Shall I tell her that she can have the
next boy over in her room that she thinks is cute? She is pretty comfortable
the way she is now so I would be foolish to indirectly push anything on her
that she did not come up with on her own. (aka exposure, manipulation, etc.)
No, this was entirely unbeknownst to our parents. My parents would
> have probably told me it was alright, but warned me that other parents
> would become insane about it, and they'd have been right
Hey, as long as it worked for all of you, buddy.....
Susan
"R. Steve Walz" <rst...@armory.com> wrote in message
news:4068F7...@armory.com...
> Sue Larson wrote:
> >
> > > > Since you are so open about this, I
> > > > am interested in knowing if there was any sexual experiences that
you
> > had
> > > > with family members while you were young (as a normal occurrence or
> > > > otherwise).
> > > --------------
> > > Other than a little with siblings, no, but with friends, a lot.
> >
> > I suspect you started within your family [siblings] and branched out.
> ---------------------
>>
>
> > But she has never expressed a desire to kiss the boy, AND she has seen
> > plenty of physical affection between my husband and I.
> ---------------------
>
>
>
> > (Interesting that she
> > watches us and always smiles, but I know that is because it makes her
feel
> > so secure to see her parents loving towards each other.)
> --------------------
> My wife said seeing her parents fooling around always made her wet.
>
>
> > But that doesn't
> > mean that she has the desire to go out and do it yet,
> -------------------
>
>
> > but at the same time,
> > she will be coming of age soon, is probably already thinking about it,
and
> > may want to start experiencing these things for herself. But she never
had
> > those desires at age seven, I can tell you that. And, it seems like you
> > never acted on those desires until you got to age eleven. However, you
can
> > throw in your experiences with family members at an earlier age, and
that is
> > where the the seed was planted for you.
> --------------------------
> Boys are usually later than girls, the operation of a penile erectile
> function and stimulation is delayed over the simpler female erectile
> function.
>
>
> > In some ways I can see your point but in other ways, I still see it as
> > pushing it on to these kids too early and before they can handle it. But
> > that is just a matter of opinion.
> ----------------------------
> >
>
> > > We carried this on in family rec-rooms, and in homemade camps in
> > > our semi-rural 800 acre forest across the road for over three years,
> > > spring, summer, and fall, and even a few winter episodes.
> >
> > I'm just curious.. did ALL the parents know this was going on when it
was
> > (did they watch or did they just know it was going on), or was it just a
> > time for you and your friends to hang out together and this is what you
did?
> >
> > Susan
> ----------------------
Jacques Michel
> > Your community was in the 70s. Are there any communities that still
> > live this way? Do they have some information on-line? Can they be
> > visited?
>
> Absolutely, but it takes place at Steve's place and his partners' homes. If
> you are interested, I suggested you be a little more open to what he has to
> say, and be nicer to him (if you want a little piece of all of them, that
> is....)
>
So you know all about it. The logical conclusion is that it is from experience.
Sorry, could not resist... ;-)
Christopher Weeks
> have tried it whithout our parents knowing. But we didn't. Even when
> one of the boys (who was probably a bit more advanced than I was)
> started to get interested, the girls turned him down.
Sadly, I didn't experience quite the fulfilling array of experimentation
that Steve got, but I and all the kids whom I knew well enough to know
(the whole neighborhood, and a few other kids), did experiment sexually
from ages as early as five (exceptional) on, with members of the same
and opposite sexes. Interestingly, my experience (in talking to and
observing (read, spying on) kids at play) suggests that early
sexploration is more common with other kids of the same sex. But I
can't know how representative the group of < 20 kids that I'm talking
about is.
> I also have contacts with 7 and 11 years olds today (mine and their
> friends). Quite frankly, your description of children and what I see
> give me the impression that we must live on different planets.
My son is nine. He has played with at least one other boy's penises. I
know that at least discussed oral sex. I didn't pry and he didn't want
me to. He's also arranged playdates with girls where they had privacy
-- who knows what they did? And he chooses coed parties (though most of
the girls' parents won't let them spend the night the way the boys
do...people are funny!).
> Now, I am willing to make the hypothesis that your experience at 11 is
> indeed as you wrote. The question then becomes: how come you met
> people having such sexual experiences all your life (apparently) while
> the world around me looks so different? I'm sorry, I can't explain
> that.
I thought everyone fooled around when they were eleven. I thought
that's what being eleven was for!
Chris
Jacques Michel
>
> Sadly, I didn't experience quite the fulfilling array of experimentation
> that Steve got, but I and all the kids whom I knew well enough to know
> (the whole neighborhood, and a few other kids), did experiment sexually
> from ages as early as five (exceptional) on, with members of the same
> and opposite sexes. Interestingly, my experience (in talking to and
> observing (read, spying on) kids at play) suggests that early
> sexploration is more common with other kids of the same sex. But I
> can't know how representative the group of < 20 kids that I'm talking
> about is.
>
and
> My son is nine. He has played with at least one other boy's penises. I
> know that at least discussed oral sex. I didn't pry and he didn't want
> me to. He's also arranged playdates with girls where they had privacy
> -- who knows what they did? And he chooses coed parties (though most of
> the girls' parents won't let them spend the night the way the boys
> do...people are funny!).
>
I am genuinely surprised. This never happened to me or around me.
Now, of course kids vary. I am interested in other people's experience
too.
Would you say that your familly was easy going as far as sexual
matters were concerned or rather that they were pretty tight up, so
that you were interested because is was forbidden?
In case somebody wonders, I suppose we are average ourselves. We don't
watch or discuss adult movies with the children, but we don't have
much hangups about nudity either (e.g. the children bathe together).
We sometimes have other children stay over for the night (boys or
girls).
R. Steve Walz
It's true, it's just not common experience for Americans BECAUSE of
the enormous degree of sexual oppression in Amerika. I LIVED this,
I haven't any reason to lie about it.
> I remember quite well when I was 11. Indeed, we boys ans girls could
> have tried it whithout our parents knowing. But we didn't. Even when
> one of the boys (who was probably a bit more advanced than I was)
> started to get interested, the girls turned him down.
-----------------------------
Boys usually want to try intercourse, which back then scared the shit
out of girls, before legal abortion, and condoms weren't even available
to most kids in the early 60's!
I had the advantage of a 14 y/o girl who was horny and jumped me,
and then turned her younger friends on to me in an early morning
sleep-over, a few days after she taught me how to 69. She had seen
her mother 69-ing with some guy she was fucking, and it made her so
wet that she HAD to find a boy and try it. She was a bright girl and
realized that oral sex was safe if she could find a safe boy, and
to her, safe meant younger, I was 11, someone she could awe, but one
with a fully grown penis, and she had seen me in trunks days
previously.
> I also have contacts with 7 and 11 years olds today (mine and their
> friends). Quite frankly, your description of children and what I see
> give me the impression that we must live on different planets.
----------------------------
Sorry, but you're wrong.
> Now, I am willing to make the hypothesis that your experience at 11 is
> indeed as you wrote. The question then becomes: how come you met
> people having such sexual experiences all your life (apparently) while
> the world around me looks so different? I'm sorry, I can't explain
> that.
-----------------------------
The first girl who jumped me made the lucky mistake of bragging about
it at her pajama party, and a couple others talked her into sharing.
> Anyway, now we know about your experiences as a kid. Did similar
> experiences also happen with your children and other children living
> in your community? Did all kids enjoy it? What happened when they grew
> to adults: did they choose a more monogamic lifestyle or not?
-----------------------------------
I have since met a LOT of people who had sex as kids at about the
same ages. The fact that I knew such things can happen made me ask
others we met all my life, and asking is all that is needed to learn
of this.
> Your community was in the 70s.
---------------------------
No, 1961, western Illinois. And it was just us kids, no community.
> Are there any communities that still
> live this way? Do they have some information on-line? Can they be
> visited?
-----------------------------
Oh, do you mean "communes" or groupsex "families"? I know of numerous
multiple partner couples, both in and out of the polyamorous affinity
groups, but you can find them online these days. It is simply not
as novel now as it once was, many college students live together, even
if they aren't groupsex oriented, and that makes them hard to locate.
In the 1970's it was simply not done to rent to a group of young
people!
Steve
R. Steve Walz
>
> Why wouldn't my friends be "starting" and my family be branching out?
> > It IS "incest" supposedly, doesn't that label titillate you?
>
> More than you can possibly imagine.
>
> > And so what is it that you imagine she means, if this isn't sexual???
> > Why would she bother?
> >
> Of course, she is beginning to take notice of boys in a different way than
> she has before, but it will be of her own time. Shall I go ahead and buy her
> a box of condoms every time she points out a good looking kid?
The first time, and every year thereafter.
> > But she has been successfully shamed by your expectations for her and
> > what you have not provided for her, and by society. Why would she
> > tell you such a thing, she knows better!
>
> You couldn't be more wrong. If I sat around the house making points ten
> times a day about sex and the human being, she probably would jump further
> ahead. What would my point be to do that though? To expose her earlier so
> she can get a head start, probably.
-----------------
Head Start is an educational program to benefit kids, this is no
different.
> That, in my view, is called manipulation.
------------------
If you have respected your kid's rights to her own choices then
she'll tell you if you're too pushy, she does with everything else,
doesn't she? Talking is not manipulation, that notion is just an
"out" that prudish parents use to avoid doing the proper job.
> My daughter knows alot about sex and everything that goes
> along with it, plus knows a whole lot more than alot of her friends (whose
> parents insist on telling them that sex means kissing).
--------------------------
Does she know everything? if not why not.
> When she is ready,
> she will know it, and that is her decision and not my place to > manipulate.
----------------------------
Nonsense, in a new situation with a newly grown body we do not
know what we want until we are given a menu. Give her the menu.
> > Nonsense, this is your stupidity speaking. Everyone WANTS precisely
> > what they fantasize about, nothing less!
>
> Thank you, sir.
------------------
Why else would they fantasize at all?
> > If you make it available, you're not pushing it.
> > If you tell a kid they can have sex in their room if they want,
> > then they know that into the future. They know that you are safe
> > about it, both to talk to, and not to interfere with their life.
>
> It IS available to her. She has asked me multiple questions already (and she
> has plenty of reading material, too). Shall I tell her that she can have the
> next boy over in her room that she thinks is cute?
--------------------------
Yes. She assumes she can't unless you tell her otherwise, unless of
course that's what you WANT her to think, and leave you deniable
about your antisexual oppression!!
> She is pretty comfortable
> the way she is now so I would be foolish to indirectly push anything on her
> that she did not come up with on her own. (aka exposure, manipulation, etc.)
------------------------------
You're just trying to utilize her ignorance to manipulate her away
from sex in a manner that leaves you deniable!
> > No, this was entirely unbeknownst to our parents. My parents would
> > have probably told me it was alright, but warned me that other parents
> > would become insane about it, and they'd have been right
>
> Hey, as long as it worked for all of you, buddy.....
>
> Susan
----------------------------------
Sure, but that was the best we could do, and we were accidentally
very lucky and also exceptionally informed, me at 11 and my 14 y/o
g/f, that is. I had hunted up the library books in the adult section,
courtesy of my grandfather's library card, and she had read everything
she could.
Your daughter is faced with intercourse, disease, and etc., and you
owe her NOT ONLLY complete information, but also the SAFEST sexual
outlet and venue for it that you can provide so that you KNOW she
is as safe as she CAN be AND as satisfied as she WANTS to be!
Anything less leaves her subject to potential danger doing this
on her own! Would you let your child learn to ride a bicycle alone
without a helmet, and make her do it on the freeway?
Sue Larson
> without a helmet, and make her do it on the freeway?
> Steve
To sum it all up, as you did, my point is no, I would not let my child learn
to ride a bicycle alone without a helmet and make her do it on the freeway.
Nor would I talk to my five year old daughter about getting up on a man's 20
speed bike to ride it when she was not physically able, even if I ran behind
her. However, if she picked out an appropriate bike that she felt
comfortable riding because she knew and felt it was her size and speed, then
I would support her. Big difference.
Susan
"R. Steve Walz" <rst...@armory.com> wrote in message
news:406A99...@armory.com...
Alina
> I thought everyone fooled around when they were eleven. I thought
> that's what being eleven was for!
>
> Chris
I know I did, a lot. If mom ever found out, I don't know, because if
she did she ignored it. Unlike Steve and if Jacques wants to know, I
am now quite hetero and monogamist.
Alina.
Jacques Michel
> Jacques Michel wrote:
> >
> >
> > I have a hard time believing you. Quite simply because whatever
> > experience I have about children or experiences I had as a child are
> > in contradiction with what you say.
> ------------------------
> It's true, it's just not common experience for Americans BECAUSE of
> the enormous degree of sexual oppression in Amerika. I LIVED this,
> I haven't any reason to lie about it.
>
1) I'm not American. I grew up in France.
2) I'm not saying that you lie, just that I find it difficult to
believe you.
>
> > I remember quite well when I was 11. Indeed, we boys ans girls could
> > have tried it whithout our parents knowing. But we didn't. Even when
> > one of the boys (who was probably a bit more advanced than I was)
> > started to get interested, the girls turned him down.
> -----------------------------
> Boys usually want to try intercourse, which back then scared the shit
> out of girls, before legal abortion, and condoms weren't even available
> to most kids in the early 60's!
>
I am a bit younger than you and contraception was available at the
time I am speaking about.
> I had the advantage of a 14 y/o girl who was horny and jumped me,
> and then turned her younger friends on to me in an early morning
> sleep-over, a few days after she taught me how to 69. She had seen
> her mother 69-ing with some guy she was fucking, and it made her so
> wet that she HAD to find a boy and try it. She was a bright girl and
> realized that oral sex was safe if she could find a safe boy, and
> to her, safe meant younger, I was 11, someone she could awe, but one
> with a fully grown penis, and she had seen me in trunks days
> previously.
>
A very rare experience indeed.
>
> > I also have contacts with 7 and 11 years olds today (mine and their
> > friends). Quite frankly, your description of children and what I see
> > give me the impression that we must live on different planets.
> ----------------------------
> Sorry, but you're wrong.
>
I know you live in California and that it is in the same planet I
live. I am sure you are bright enough to understand a figure of
speech.
>
> > Now, I am willing to make the hypothesis that your experience at 11 is
> > indeed as you wrote. The question then becomes: how come you met
> > people having such sexual experiences all your life (apparently) while
> > the world around me looks so different? I'm sorry, I can't explain
> > that.
> -----------------------------
> The first girl who jumped me made the lucky mistake of bragging about
> it at her pajama party, and a couple others talked her into sharing.
>
I was more thinking about your latter experiences. Group marriage,
etc.
>
> > Anyway, now we know about your experiences as a kid. Did similar
> > experiences also happen with your children and other children living
> > in your community? Did all kids enjoy it? What happened when they grew
> > to adults: did they choose a more monogamic lifestyle or not?
> -----------------------------------
> I have since met a LOT of people who had sex as kids at about the
> same ages. The fact that I knew such things can happen made me ask
> others we met all my life, and asking is all that is needed to learn
> of this.
>
All the people I know (most of it from my work) are frustrated adults
that waited till their thirties to loose their virginity by marriage
(because they lacked any other offer in their school days). Their wife
are either quite content to be done with the matter at 40 or simply
divorce.
Quite a different population.
>
> > Your community was in the 70s.
> ---------------------------
> No, 1961, western Illinois. And it was just us kids, no community.
>
>
> > Are there any communities that still
> > live this way? Do they have some information on-line? Can they be
> > visited?
> -----------------------------
> Oh, do you mean "communes" or groupsex "families"? I know of numerous
> multiple partner couples, both in and out of the polyamorous affinity
> groups, but you can find them online these days. It is simply not
> as novel now as it once was, many college students live together, even
> if they aren't groupsex oriented, and that makes them hard to locate.
>
Yes, I meant commune. If you can find them online, would you know a
web site? I'd like to read about the way they are organised.
Christopher Weeks
> Would you say that your familly was easy going as far as sexual
> matters were concerned or rather that they were pretty tight up, so
> that you were interested because is was forbidden?
My parents are prudes. But my mom thoroughly believed that it was her
duty to educate me about sex, and young. They were free love hippies,
philosophically, but at least my mother (and my guess is both of them)
have never slept with anyone else. When I was five or so, my mom
explained everything she could think of. We didn't talk about it much
after that, but I was free to get brief informational answers to the
best of their ability whenever I wanted.
> In case somebody wonders, I suppose we are average ourselves. We don't
> watch or discuss adult movies with the children, but we don't have
> much hangups about nudity either (e.g. the children bathe together).
> We sometimes have other children stay over for the night (boys or
> girls).
We are frequently undressed or partially dressed around the kids. We
don't wear anything in the hot tub on the back deck. We occasionally
bathe with the kids. But we don't have sex in front of them. I'm
completely philosophically aligned with Steve on the issue, but I'm a
little uncomfortable with the idea. But Cathy is unwaveringly
unwilling. I think we're being irresponsible about it, but nobody's
perfect and the kids could certainly do worse.
Chris
R. Steve Walz
>
> Would you let your child learn to ride a bicycle alone
> > without a helmet, and make her do it on the freeway?
> > Steve
>
> To sum it all up, as you did, my point is no, I would not let my child learn
> to ride a bicycle alone without a helmet and make her do it on the freeway.
> Nor would I talk to my five year old daughter about getting up on a man's 20
> speed bike to ride it when she was not physically able, even if I ran behind
> her. However, if she picked out an appropriate bike that she felt
> comfortable riding because she knew and felt it was her size and speed, then
> I would support her. Big difference.
>
> Susan
Support her no matter what. Then you are loving her.
If she wants to try a man's 20-speed, let her.
If you're right, she'll find out, and hear you
all the better in the future, and without hating you.
Steve
> "R. Steve Walz" <rst...@armory.com> wrote in message
R. Steve Walz
>
> "R. Steve Walz" <rst...@armory.com> wrote in message news:<406A94...@armory.com>...
> > Jacques Michel wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > I have a hard time believing you. Quite simply because whatever
> > > experience I have about children or experiences I had as a child are
> > > in contradiction with what you say.
> > ------------------------
> > It's true, it's just not common experience for Americans BECAUSE of
> > the enormous degree of sexual oppression in Amerika. I LIVED this,
> > I haven't any reason to lie about it.
>
> 1) I'm not American. I grew up in France.
> 2) I'm not saying that you lie, just that I find it difficult to
> believe you.
I don't know why. You can ask all over the net all over the world
and find lots of similar experiences, *I* certainly have.
> > > I remember quite well when I was 11. Indeed, we boys ans girls could
> > > have tried it whithout our parents knowing. But we didn't. Even when
> > > one of the boys (who was probably a bit more advanced than I was)
> > > started to get interested, the girls turned him down.
> > -----------------------------
> > Boys usually want to try intercourse, which back then scared the shit
> > out of girls, before legal abortion, and condoms weren't even available
> > to most kids in the early 60's!
>
> I am a bit younger than you and contraception was available at the
> time I am speaking about.
---------------------------
If we'd had condoms we'd have all have been fucking.
Carefully, but fucking.
> > I had the advantage of a 14 y/o girl who was horny and jumped me,
> > and then turned her younger friends on to me in an early morning
> > sleep-over, a few days after she taught me how to 69. She had seen
> > her mother 69-ing with some guy she was fucking, and it made her so
> > wet that she HAD to find a boy and try it. She was a bright girl and
> > realized that oral sex was safe if she could find a safe boy, and
> > to her, safe meant younger, I was 11, someone she could awe, but one
> > with a fully grown penis, and she had seen me in trunks days
> > previously.
>
> A very rare experience indeed.
--------------------------
Not to my knowledge of the experiences of others I have heard over
the years. In fact that age and sex, 14 Y/O girls, are reknown for
soliciting sex with younger boys because it makes them feel safe
and they want to run things for their first experiences. I know
of four other similar instances offhand.
> > > I also have contacts with 7 and 11 years olds today (mine and their
> > > friends). Quite frankly, your description of children and what I see
> > > give me the impression that we must live on different planets.
> > ----------------------------
> > Sorry, but you're wrong.
>
> I know you live in California and that it is in the same planet I
> live. I am sure you are bright enough to understand a figure of
> speech.
-------------------------------------
No, actually all I'm speaking from is experience with the rural
kids I knew in western Illlinois in 1961. And while I have heard
many personal tales of people's earliest sexual explorations, they
were usually in other states, most Californians are immigrants from
other eastern US States.
> > > Now, I am willing to make the hypothesis that your experience at 11 is
> > > indeed as you wrote. The question then becomes: how come you met
> > > people having such sexual experiences all your life (apparently) while
> > > the world around me looks so different? I'm sorry, I can't explain
> > > that.
> > -----------------------------
> > The first girl who jumped me made the lucky mistake of bragging about
> > it at her pajama party, and a couple others talked her into sharing.
> >
>
> I was more thinking about your latter experiences. Group marriage,
> etc.
------------------------
The atmosphere sexually in the 1970's was quite different, we had
contraception but no AIDs or even Hep-C, not even much Herpes. The
only STDs were eminently curable. All we had to do was promote our
ideas on handouts and people showed up if they were interested. We
wound up with waaay more folks than we could find a house big enough
for,sowe encouraged them to start one of their own, which they did!
> > > Anyway, now we know about your experiences as a kid. Did similar
> > > experiences also happen with your children and other children living
> > > in your community? Did all kids enjoy it? What happened when they grew
> > > to adults: did they choose a more monogamic lifestyle or not?
> > -----------------------------------
> > I have since met a LOT of people who had sex as kids at about the
> > same ages. The fact that I knew such things can happen made me ask
> > others we met all my life, and asking is all that is needed to learn
> > of this.
>
> All the people I know (most of it from my work) are frustrated adults
> that waited till their thirties to loose their virginity by marriage
> (because they lacked any other offer in their school days). Their wife
> are either quite content to be done with the matter at 40 or simply
> divorce.
>
> Quite a different population.
-------------------
How sick. Ick, a wasted life. They should have given it away to the
first person who would take it by wearing a fucking sign if need be!!
To me that would be the worst of all possible lives.
> > > Your community was in the 70s.
> > ---------------------------
> > No, 1961, western Illinois. And it was just us kids, no community.
> >
> > > Are there any communities that still
> > > live this way? Do they have some information on-line? Can they be
> > > visited?
> > -----------------------------
> > Oh, do you mean "communes" or groupsex "families"? I know of numerous
> > multiple partner couples, both in and out of the polyamorous affinity
> > groups, but you can find them online these days. It is simply not
> > as novel now as it once was, many college students live together, even
> > if they aren't groupsex oriented, and that makes them hard to locate.
>
> > In the 1970's it was simply not done to rent to a group of young
> > people!
> > Steve
>
> Yes, I meant commune. If you can find them online, would you know a
> web site? I'd like to read about the way they are organised.
---------------------
Google for it. There are lots.
Steve
Jacques Michel
>
> I know I did, a lot. If mom ever found out, I don't know, because if
> she did she ignored it. Unlike Steve and if Jacques wants to know, I
> am now quite hetero and monogamist.
>
I never thought that fooling around at age 11 would lead one to become
bisexual and polyamorous! I think that fooling around at age 11 will
lead one to be more happy about one's sexual life (it seems to make
sense that it will at least help one to have better feeling about
sexual interactions), unless one feels forced to do so.
To make things more clear: I would like my children to develop an
healthy view of sexual matters and if they would fool around, I would
simply accept it as ok. OTOH, I would think it is one step too far if
the idea will come from me. The best I could do is to offer them a
book about the matter, and yes it discusses subject like masturbation
in an honest way, but as part of the total package together with
biology, contraception, bodily changes in teens and feelings.
Alina
> OTOH, I would think it is one step too far if
> the idea will come from me.
That would be rather sick, I think :-)
> The best I could do is to offer them a
> book about the matter, and yes it discusses subject like masturbation
> in an honest way, but as part of the total package together with
> biology, contraception, bodily changes in teens and feelings.
Right. Answer their questions when they have them, and most of all BE
natural about sex. (That does not mean have sex in front of them but
do discuss it freely and naturally).
Alina.
Sue Larson
> If she wants to try a man's 20-speed, let her.
>
> If you're right, she'll find out, and hear you
> all the better in the future, and without hating you.
> Steve
>
way around.
Susan
"R. Steve Walz" <rst...@armory.com> wrote in message
news:406B9D...@armory.com...
> Sue Larson wrote:
> >
> > Would you let your child learn to ride a bicycle alone
> > > without a helmet, and make her do it on the freeway?
> > > Steve
> >
> > To sum it all up, as you did, my point is no, I would not let my child
learn
> > to ride a bicycle alone without a helmet and make her do it on the
freeway.
> > Nor would I talk to my five year old daughter about getting up on a
man's 20
> > speed bike to ride it when she was not physically able, even if I ran
behind
> > her. However, if she picked out an appropriate bike that she felt
> > comfortable riding because she knew and felt it was her size and speed,
then
> > I would support her. Big difference.
> >
> > Susan
> ------------------------
>
Jacques Michel
> Jacques Michel wrote:
> >
(snip)
> >
> > that waited till their thirties to loose their virginity by marriage
> > (because they lacked any other offer in their school days). Their wife
> > are either quite content to be done with the matter at 40 or simply
> > divorce.
> >
> > Quite a different population.
> -------------------
> How sick. Ick, a wasted life. They should have given it away to the
> first person who would take it by wearing a fucking sign if need be!!
> To me that would be the worst of all possible lives.
>
But this is what they are doing, Steve. This is exactly what they are
doing: go around and wear a "please fuck me" sign. And nobody is
interested. Just point your newsreader at alt.support.shyness,
alt.support.depression or soc.sexuality.general, there are at least 10
a day. Or go to any matchmaking service and look for yourself:
thousands of young males, clean, having a good job, no disease and
desperate enough to loose their virginity that they give sizeable
amounts of money just for the privilege to pass a tiny little add:
"looking for somebody who wants to fuck me".
So tell us, Steve: where are those hordes of lustfull women that you
keep talking about? Or rather, tell THEM, Steve, I am sure you could
make lots and lots of money. Heck, from the top of my head I can find
at least 20 guys that would pay dearly for the privilege to lick a
woman to orgasm. And let you demonstrate sex first, using their body
if needed be. Yes, they are THAT desperate.
But you can't do that. Because the world is not as you dream, Steve.
Sorry.
(snip)
> >
> > Yes, I meant commune. If you can find them online, would you know a
> > web site? I'd like to read about the way they are organised.
> ---------------------
> Google for it. There are lots.
I tried that. I will write about it in its own right, because the view
is complex and quite different to what you want us to believe.
R. Steve Walz
>
> > Support her no matter what. Then you are loving her.
> > If she wants to try a man's 20-speed, let her.
> >
> > If you're right, she'll find out, and hear you
> > all the better in the future, and without hating you.
> > Steve
> >
> I agree 100%, but it would be her desire and her decision, and not the other
> way around.
>
> Susan
If you don't dishonor and disrespect her by trying to control her,
then she won't let men do that either!!
Steve
R. Steve Walz
>
> "R. Steve Walz" <rst...@armory.com> wrote in message news:<406BA2...@armory.com>...
> > Jacques Michel wrote:
> > >
> (snip)
> > >
> > > All the people I know (most of it from my work) are frustrated adults
> > > that waited till their thirties to loose their virginity by marriage
> > > (because they lacked any other offer in their school days). Their wife
> > > are either quite content to be done with the matter at 40 or simply
> > > divorce.
> > >
> > > Quite a different population.
> > -------------------
> > How sick. Ick, a wasted life. They should have given it away to the
> > first person who would take it by wearing a fucking sign if need be!!
> > To me that would be the worst of all possible lives.
>
> But this is what they are doing, Steve. This is exactly what they are
> doing: go around and wear a "please fuck me" sign. And nobody is
> interested.
This is nonsense. I knew a girl who wore a Ask Me to Fuck You
button for just one day, and she was very plain looking and heavy,
and she had a pocket full of phone numbers at the end of the day.
She was just SO shocked that she was actually attractive to
someone that it changed her whole life! She's doing sex therapy
now, and has a bowl of those buttons!
> Just point your newsreader at alt.support.shyness,
> alt.support.depression or soc.sexuality.general, there are at least 10
> a day. Or go to any matchmaking service and look for yourself:
> thousands of young males, clean, having a good job, no disease and
> desperate enough to loose their virginity that they give sizeable
> amounts of money just for the privilege to pass a tiny little add:
> "looking for somebody who wants to fuck me".
----------------------------------
Sure, but this is merely the result of what I call the artificial
scarcity of sex in antisexual societies. Since this society forces
people to wear clothes they can't see who is attracted to them and
the message is even out there that you don't dare ask for sex either,
or even tell someone you're attracted to them.
Most over-weight people are actually substituting food for sex
because they can't believe they can get it. Add the don't ask don't
tell message about wanting sex and attraction and about speaking of
sex at all in public and you wind up with an entirely inhumane and
untenable situation.
> So tell us, Steve: where are those hordes of lustfull women that you
> keep talking about? Or rather, tell THEM, Steve, I am sure you could
> make lots and lots of money. Heck, from the top of my head I can find
> at least 20 guys that would pay dearly for the privilege to lick a
> woman to orgasm. And let you demonstrate sex first, using their body
> if needed be. Yes, they are THAT desperate.
---------------------
You DO have to ASK them!! We learned the secret, that everybody wants
to fuck, unless they are too tired or too scared or have such terrible
and demolished self-esteem that they think someone must surely have a
criminally sick ulterior motive to even want them. So consequently
I have no problem about telling women they're sexy and telling them
that I'd love to lick their pee-pee like an ice crewam cone till they
explode all over my tongue.
> But you can't do that. Because the world is not as you dream, Steve.
> Sorry.
---------------------
Sure you can. And yes it is, if you ASK!
> > > Yes, I meant commune. If you can find them online, would you know a
> > > web site? I'd like to read about the way they are organised.
> > ---------------------
> > Google for it. There are lots.
>
> I tried that. I will write about it in its own right, because the view
> is complex and quite different to what you want us to believe.
--------------------------------
Want you to believe? It's nothing more than what *I* believe.
Steve
Jacques Michel
> jak...@yahoo.com (Jacques Michel) wrote in message news:<5e2ca8a5.04033...@posting.google.com>...
>
> > OTOH, I would think it is one step too far if
> > the idea will come from me.
>
> That would be rather sick, I think :-)
>
Glad to see someone who agrees with me. But it does not solve my
problem: what if they never come with the idea? Or wait till they are
late in their teen years to start really thinking about the matter?
This is a problem that is much more prevalent than most people would
believe. It is usually ignored, because most parents are quite content
to see their children not engaging in such activities and directing
their energy into schooling or sports instead. Yet I have seen the
outcome quite frequently around me and the results are quite damaging.
If you don't have sexual development at the right age, there is no way
you can catch up afterwards.
To summarize what I have seen happen:
-children who wait till 15-17 to make their first exploratory moves
(and I don't necessarily mean intercourse here, but rather what has
been described like "fooling around": kissing, dating, whatever), are
awkward about those matters at an age when other children are more
experienced
-they end up ostracized by their peers
-classically, the girls will adapt by playing the "I want to reserve
myself for marriage" line and the boys will become nerds. Sometimes
the other way around.
-this behaviour further prevents them of having social interactions
that would be normal at their age and the parents cannot compensate
(classically, the parents may send them to parties and the child will
find that he cannot operate in this environment and will live it as a
dreadfull experience)
-the vicious circle may be broken at a later age (say 18-25, sometimes
as late as 40) by the young adult giving himself to an abusive person
(classicaly the better looking girls who got picked up by bad guys),
by marriage (classicaly, the boys with the better jobs being picked up
by a woman looking for a regular source of income and those marriages
are not happy) or simply never be broken (I certainly know of people
in their 40-50s who still are in that stage, male and female).
Obviously, I don't want that for my children. I would rather see them
have social interactions that are around what is generally accepted
for their age. But it is not easy to steer along that line.
> > The best I could do is to offer them a
> > book about the matter, and yes it discusses subject like masturbation
> > in an honest way, but as part of the total package together with
> > biology, contraception, bodily changes in teens and feelings.
>
> Right. Answer their questions when they have them, and most of all BE
> natural about sex. (That does not mean have sex in front of them but
> do discuss it freely and naturally).
>
I can already see how Steve will respond to that: you can't be natural
about sex if the door is closed. I think Steve is a door fetish. ;-)
More seriously: sure discussing sex freely and naturally is the
minimum one can do (although the "naturally" part cannot be forced,
so...), but I don't think it is enough. I have seen children who knew
quite a lot about the biological and emotional aspects of sexuality
(it is part of the school program where I live), yet were completely
blocked about it. It actually made the frustration worse.
Sue Larson
> button for just one day, and she was very plain looking and heavy,
{Wonder how she got heavy in the first place.} She was plainly seeking out
love and companionship.
> and she had a pocket full of phone numbers at the end of the day.
> She was just SO shocked that she was actually attractive to
> someone that it changed her whole life!
Men are so horny that of course she had a lot of phone numbers. How much
easier can things get for them. We can only speculate how many men called
her again once the thrill was over (and if they did, it was only because
they called her for that reason when they were horny and nothing else). "An
easy piece...." I believe is what it is called. And, for her, she got the
attention and affection she was craving. This would work for awhile; at some
point, it will probably all come down on her.
She's doing sex therapy
> now, and has a bowl of those buttons!
Sex therapy: Is this a group learning experience? And, most importantly, are
you her therapist?
Susan
"R. Steve Walz" <rst...@armory.com> wrote in message
news:406CE9...@armory.com...
> Jacques Michel wrote:
> >
> > "R. Steve Walz" <rst...@armory.com> wrote in message
news:<406BA2...@armory.com>...
> > > Jacques Michel wrote:
> > > >
> > (snip)
> > > >
> > > > All the people I know (most of it from my work) are frustrated
adults
> > > > that waited till their thirties to loose their virginity by marriage
> > > > (because they lacked any other offer in their school days). Their
wife
> > > > are either quite content to be done with the matter at 40 or simply
> > > > divorce.
> > > >
> > > > Quite a different population.
> > > -------------------
> > > How sick. Ick, a wasted life. They should have given it away to the
> > > first person who would take it by wearing a fucking sign if need be!!
> > > To me that would be the worst of all possible lives.
> >
> > But this is what they are doing, Steve. This is exactly what they are
> > doing: go around and wear a "please fuck me" sign. And nobody is
> > interested.
> -------------------
>
>
Christopher Weeks
> This is a problem that is much more prevalent than most people would
> believe. It is usually ignored, because most parents are quite content
> to see their children not engaging in such activities and directing
> their energy into schooling or sports instead. Yet I have seen the
> outcome quite frequently around me and the results are quite damaging.
> If you don't have sexual development at the right age, there is no way
> you can catch up afterwards.
I'm not at all convinced by your anecdotal evidence. I know lots of
people who started young and started late. And I know people who are
messed up about sex and others who are sexually healthy. And I'm not
seeing the pattern you describe.
> To summarize what I have seen happen:
> -children who wait till 15-17 to make their first exploratory moves
> (and I don't necessarily mean intercourse here, but rather what has
> been described like "fooling around": kissing, dating, whatever), are
> awkward about those matters at an age when other children are more
> experienced
Sure. Anyone new to anything is awkward. That goes away pretty fast.
The great thing about sex is that once you do discover it, you
invariably want to practice all the time.
> -they end up ostracized by their peers
Look, I was ostracized by my peers because I didn't know how to get
along with kids. For most of my life, most of my friends have been
adults. I lacked certain social skills. And frankly, it limited my
sexual options. But I'd attribute the causal relationship opposite of
what you have done.
> -classically, the girls will adapt by playing the "I want to reserve
> myself for marriage" line and the boys will become nerds. Sometimes
> the other way around.
No, I think those girls have been shamed into _actually_ believing that
from before the time when they might have started sexploration on their
own. I don't think it's generally a defense mechanism. And there are
boys in exactly the same boat.
> -this behaviour further prevents them of having social interactions
> that would be normal at their age and the parents cannot compensate
> (classically, the parents may send them to parties and the child will
> find that he cannot operate in this environment and will live it as a
> dreadfull experience)
I think you're tying too much effect (social incongruence) to the cause
(late sexploration).
> -the vicious circle may be broken at a later age (say 18-25, sometimes
> as late as 40) by the young adult giving himself to an abusive person
> (classicaly the better looking girls who got picked up by bad guys),
> by marriage (classicaly, the boys with the better jobs being picked up
> by a woman looking for a regular source of income and those marriages
> are not happy) or simply never be broken (I certainly know of people
> in their 40-50s who still are in that stage, male and female).
Wow! What are the circumstances of your life? You were born in France.
Are you still there? I haven't been to Europe since I was a toddler,
but I had this idea that the French were sexually liberated. Is that
just a common myth?
I knew people in college who claimed to be waiting for marriage (some of
whom would have oral and anal sex...silly peeps) but I sort of figured
they were just using that as an excuse not to sleep with _me_. The only
men I know that are older than 25 who would like to be married or
otherwise entangled, and are not, are overly picky. This guy at work
wants women to be a size two. Well, he's cut out most of the population
of women right there! (And he has other bizarre notions.) He's not
much of a catch himself, so he's destined to gloom.
> Obviously, I don't want that for my children. I would rather see them
> have social interactions that are around what is generally accepted
> for their age. But it is not easy to steer along that line.
How are you raising them that makes you expect such a miserable outlook?
I may have missed that if it was earlier in the thread.
> I can already see how Steve will respond to that: you can't be natural
> about sex if the door is closed. I think Steve is a door fetish. ;-)
He's right, though! It's the rest of us who have the door fetishes.
Seriously, why should we take sexual privacy to such an extreme? There
may be some deem genetic programming to procreate in a protected
environment because you're somewhat vulnerable while in the process.
But geez, can't we get over it?
> More seriously: sure discussing sex freely and naturally is the
> minimum one can do (although the "naturally" part cannot be forced,
It has to be forced. You must force yourself to do some, as if it were
natural to you, when in fact you (and I!) are a product of a prudish
society. That's what we owe to our kids.
> so...), but I don't think it is enough. I have seen children who knew
> quite a lot about the biological and emotional aspects of sexuality
> (it is part of the school program where I live), yet were completely
> blocked about it. It actually made the frustration worse.
Blocked?
Chris
R. Steve Walz
>
> Jacques Michel wrote:
>
> > This is a problem that is much more prevalent than most people would
> > believe. It is usually ignored, because most parents are quite content
> > to see their children not engaging in such activities and directing
> > their energy into schooling or sports instead. Yet I have seen the
> > outcome quite frequently around me and the results are quite damaging.
> > If you don't have sexual development at the right age, there is no way
> > you can catch up afterwards.
>
> I'm not at all convinced by your anecdotal evidence. I know lots of
> people who started young and started late. And I know people who are
> messed up about sex and others who are sexually healthy. And I'm not
> seeing the pattern you describe.
What IS true is that most Americans are sexually desperate in an
ongoing fashion most of their lives, and this is often even if they
are married. But we are also seeing fewer and fewer people marrying,
and this means that a much higher proportion than ever are absolutely
desperate. What I see is a society that has become sexually paranoid,
fearing sex everywhere, while secretly craving it, they are, quite
literally, terrified of THEIR OWN SECRET DESIRES, desires that grow
more darkly fierce the more they are denied. This is why people are
too frightened to ask anyone at work, and at home they are more than
ever solitary and alone, and they feel it is TOTALLY impossible in
their churches or in clubs they belong to, and that sexual offers are
even MORE unwelcome at the stores where they SHOP! They quite literally
have no place to go except to throw themselves before strangers, so
they at LEAST don't KNOW anyone where they beg and grovel for sex!!
And even then they are so terrified and alone that they feel they
simply must get drunk to even ask anyone for anything! This society
is an extremely sad gag, a regular booby-prize, as cultures and
societies go.
Any DECENT society would have a place people could go and simply be
guaranteed sexual release with others, where they wouldn't feel shamed
and embarrassed to even ask for it.
> > To summarize what I have seen happen:
> > -children who wait till 15-17 to make their first exploratory moves
> > (and I don't necessarily mean intercourse here, but rather what has
> > been described like "fooling around": kissing, dating, whatever), are
> > awkward about those matters at an age when other children are more
> > experienced
>
> Sure. Anyone new to anything is awkward. That goes away pretty fast.
> The great thing about sex is that once you do discover it, you
> invariably want to practice all the time.
-------------------
Anything you don't learn early works a lot like re-learning to walk
after an extreme injury, it never works quite right. Walking, new
languages, talking, hearing, even thinking, if you only get them
late you never incorporate them into your being properly.
> > -they end up ostracized by their peers
>
> Look, I was ostracized by my peers because I didn't know how to get
> along with kids. For most of my life, most of my friends have been
> adults. I lacked certain social skills. And frankly, it limited my
> sexual options. But I'd attribute the causal relationship opposite of
> what you have done.
----------------------------
The only cultures that have kid-cultures different than those of their
parents are societies that are fractured or severely damaged.
> > -classically, the girls will adapt by playing the "I want to reserve
> > myself for marriage" line and the boys will become nerds. Sometimes
> > the other way around.
>
> No, I think those girls have been shamed into _actually_ believing that
> from before the time when they might have started sexploration on their
> own. I don't think it's generally a defense mechanism. And there are
> boys in exactly the same boat.
---------------------
Yup.
> > -this behaviour further prevents them of having social interactions
> > that would be normal at their age and the parents cannot compensate
> > (classically, the parents may send them to parties and the child will
> > find that he cannot operate in this environment and will live it as a
> > dreadfull experience)
>
> I think you're tying too much effect (social incongruence) to the cause
> (late sexploration).
---------------------------------
No, it's quite true.
> > -the vicious circle may be broken at a later age (say 18-25, sometimes
> > as late as 40) by the young adult giving himself to an abusive person
> > (classicaly the better looking girls who got picked up by bad guys),
> > by marriage (classicaly, the boys with the better jobs being picked up
> > by a woman looking for a regular source of income and those marriages
> > are not happy) or simply never be broken (I certainly know of people
> > in their 40-50s who still are in that stage, male and female).
>
> Wow! What are the circumstances of your life? You were born in France.
> Are you still there? I haven't been to Europe since I was a toddler,
> but I had this idea that the French were sexually liberated. Is that
> just a common myth?
------------------------------
This person is distorted, but unusual among YOUNG Europeans.
I suspect this one is quite old.
> I knew people in college who claimed to be waiting for marriage (some of
> whom would have oral and anal sex...silly peeps) but I sort of figured
> they were just using that as an excuse not to sleep with _me_.
----------------
Why? Abortion and contraception has been available in Europe since
the 1960's and earlier? Are you THAT old?
> The only
> men I know that are older than 25 who would like to be married or
> otherwise entangled, and are not, are overly picky. This guy at work
> wants women to be a size two. Well, he's cut out most of the population
> of women right there! (And he has other bizarre notions.) He's not
> much of a catch himself, so he's destined to gloom.
-------------------------------
If one is going to settle for only one partner forever, why not hold
out for what you want and take what you can get for one-night stands
till you do?
On the other hand, they may simply feel that the prospect of settling
for just one partner forever is too depressing to really let themselves
get trapped into, and I agree. In THAT case, is it you who is keeping
yourself from having sex if you can't get a man all to yourself???
If you're not fucking your casual dates, no wonder no one will bother
to fuck you at ALL! You're too picky! Life's NOT LONG enough to either
permit or to justify such twisted perfectionism!
> > Obviously, I don't want that for my children. I would rather see them
> > have social interactions that are around what is generally accepted
> > for their age. But it is not easy to steer along that line.
>
> How are you raising them that makes you expect such a miserable outlook?
> I may have missed that if it was earlier in the thread.
>
> > I can already see how Steve will respond to that: you can't be natural
> > about sex if the door is closed. I think Steve is a door fetish. ;-)
>
> He's right, though! It's the rest of us who have the door fetishes.
> Seriously, why should we take sexual privacy to such an extreme? There
> may be some deem genetic programming to procreate in a protected
> environment because you're somewhat vulnerable while in the process.
> But geez, can't we get over it?
---------------------
Sexual privacy is an extreme cultural anomaly, like unto ubangee lips
or neck rings to stretch your neck.
> > More seriously: sure discussing sex freely and naturally is the
> > minimum one can do (although the "naturally" part cannot be forced,
>
> It has to be forced. You must force yourself to do some, as if it were
> natural to you, when in fact you (and I!) are a product of a prudish
> society. That's what we owe to our kids.
-------------
Only when you force yourself till you become inured to it does it then
become natural. This kind of natural is the way it would have been if
you had been raised yourself to be that candid. At least it's the best
you can do.
> > so...), but I don't think it is enough. I have seen children who knew
> > quite a lot about the biological and emotional aspects of sexuality
> > (it is part of the school program where I live), yet were completely
> > blocked about it. It actually made the frustration worse.
>
> Blocked?
>
> Chris
--------------------------------------
Book knowledge is blocked knowledge, which is why it's better to
fuck in front of your kids every day of their lives and to welcome
any curious advances they make upon your genitals with a smile and
any reciprocity which they welcome. That's the ONLY way to destroy
the horrible sick distortion of Nature that laughably calls itself
this "society".
Steve
R. Steve Walz
>
> > This is nonsense. I knew a girl who wore a Ask Me to Fuck You
> > button for just one day, and she was very plain looking and heavy,
>
> {Wonder how she got heavy in the first place.} She was plainly seeking out
> love and companionship.
Some people are just heavy, but they often get heavier in our culture
directly as a compensation for sexual poverty.
> > and she had a pocket full of phone numbers at the end of the day.
> > She was just SO shocked that she was actually attractive to
> > someone that it changed her whole life!
>
> Men are so horny that of course she had a lot of phone numbers. How much
> easier can things get for them.
-------------------------
Ask yourself seriously why this would ever be bad???????????
> We can only speculate how many men called
> her again once the thrill was over (and if they did, it was only because
> they called her for that reason when they were horny and nothing else).
------------------------
You've a twisted view of sex, as nothing more than a "lure" that
then you reel in, and NOT something that men will CONTINUE to enjoy
sharing with you periodically! Men might want variety, but they are
also loyal to their fuck-friends, and women in this culture are so
desperately needy and greedy that they refuse to "get" that! What is
wrong with YOU having several men you fuck often? Why don't you want
MORE than just ONE fuck friend?? People who only want one friend are
then only one person's death away from total emotional hopelessness!
> "An
> easy piece...." I believe is what it is called. And, for her, she got the
> attention and affection she was craving. This would work for awhile; at some
> point, it will probably all come down on her.
-----------------------
No, actually, it doesn't. My wife of 20 years was the sort of girl
you imagine, and she has had to literally refuse numerous partners
all her life if they became possessive or tedious, and she was a
short somewhat plain plumb hairy-legged, fat-assed horny little
Jewish girl. She was always the sweet little slut among our friends,
the group "bike" that anyone of us could "ride", and that's WHY I
loved her so much. She was a giving person!! And she chose me over
others for most of her life BECAUSE I could accept that about her,
and appreciate it in her as a noble and divine virtue!
> She's doing sex therapy
> > now, and has a bowl of those buttons!
>
> Sex therapy: Is this a group learning experience? And, most importantly, are
> you her therapist?
> Susan
------------------
No, SHE became the therapist.
Steve
Sue Larson
> directly as a compensation for sexual poverty.
Or to ward men off because of earlier abuse by some man.
> > Men are so horny that of course she had a lot of phone numbers. How much
> > easier can things get for them.
> -------------------------
> Ask yourself seriously why this would ever be bad???????????
Because they only want one thing from her and when they get it, they toss
her aside until the next time. I think that most women want a little more
than just sex with a man; friendship would be nice, too. Sometimes
friendship comes with the package, but I bet alot of times it doesn't.
You've a twisted view of sex, as nothing more than a "lure" that
> then you reel in, and NOT something that men will CONTINUE to enjoy
> sharing with you periodically! Men might want variety, but they are
> also loyal to their fuck-friends, and women in this culture are so
> desperately needy and greedy that they refuse to "get" that! What is
> wrong with YOU having several men you fuck often? Why don't you want
> MORE than just ONE fuck friend?? People who only want one friend are
> then only one person's death away from total emotional hopelessness!
>
I do not have the twisted view of sex. You once said that if it were not for
sex, women would be useless on this planet (is that not twisted?) So, that
means that women are good for only one thing, really, isn't that so? As far
as the rest of what you perceive and question, long gone are the days when I
had the "fun" of college years dating various guys and doing as I wished.
Then I met a guy that I fell in love with and would never desire to be with
anyone else. All those fun days and nights with different men was loads of
fun, don't get me wrong, but then I grew up and wanted something more
substantial in my life. I find that being with one person is very rewarding
and enriching, and something that most people have or want. It is not an
abuse that people have suffered, either. It is one of the primitive and one
of the most necessary of human needs -- companionship and LOVE. If you don't
have love, you have a bit of loneliness, and no amount of sex can fill that
void. That is a loneliness I would not choose to have now. That shlong of
yours that you have had since you were eleven may have gotten you far with
many women, but are you seriously a deeply contented man? Sometimes, Steve,
you seem like such an angry, embittered person who just wants to shove facts
and opinions down people's throats, and I haven't quite figured out the
reasoning behind it all. But I sure would.
Susan
"R. Steve Walz" <rst...@armory.com> wrote in message
news:406D66...@armory.com...
> --
> Sue Larson wrote:
> >
> > > This is nonsense. I knew a girl who wore a Ask Me to Fuck You
> > > button for just one day, and she was very plain looking and heavy,
> >
> > {Wonder how she got heavy in the first place.} She was plainly seeking
out
> > love and companionship.
> -------------------------
>
>
> > > and she had a pocket full of phone numbers at the end of the day.
> > > She was just SO shocked that she was actually attractive to
> > > someone that it changed her whole life!
> >
>
>
> > We can only speculate how many men called
> > her again once the thrill was over (and if they did, it was only because
> > they called her for that reason when they were horny and nothing else).
> ------------------------
>>
R. Steve Walz
>
> > Some people are just heavy, but they often get heavier in our culture
> > directly as a compensation for sexual poverty.
>
> Or to ward men off because of earlier abuse by some man.
Most of this imagined male "abuse" amounts to not marrying them
immediately after their first sex. These women are deluded and so
shamed that some don't even use sex properly as they should for
pleasure. And then they fantasize that they are "damaged goods"
if some guy doesn't call right away or the next day! Or they
don't like being fondled in public, or wearing sexually revealing
clothing for what it was intended for, access!!
> > > Men are so horny that of course she had a lot of phone numbers. How much
> > > easier can things get for them.
> > -------------------------
> > Ask yourself seriously why this would ever be bad???????????
>
> Because they only want one thing from her and when they get it,
> they toss her aside until the next time.
------------------
And did you think he should stay and do her hair or what? Many of
these women as currently configured do NOT often make good friends
for men, they are too needy and greedy, irrational and lack proper
respectful accountability to others. They were overly pampered on
one hand and shamed and guilted on the other and are psychologically
defective! The way MANY women today are programmed, most men can't
STAND them for long!
Really, what was it that you thought they can do together besides
fuck? Talk over recipes, decorating or make-over tips? Should
they build a deck? Why NOT agree to get together just to have
sex again in a couple days?? They have nothing else in common!
That's the nature of the gender-GULF that this society produces
by abusively shaming and controlling and trying to de-sex young
women!!
It's not that the women *I* know and fuck aren't suitable friends
for ME, but I know that amounts to a small minority of women, the
women *I* know are rather "butch" tom-boys, they like making things,
and fixing things, and watching porn, hackneyed sick wacko cult
movies, and eating fatty foods! They don't shave their legs and
they don't do make-up except on Halloween! If it weren't for the
fact that they adore as many cocks as they can get, they'd be
Lesbians, and a couple ARE quite bisexual!! The girls I love don't
diet much, are typically broader plumper hairier women with big
droopy tits, huge nipples, and soft shoulders, and I love that!
> I think that most women want a little more
> than just sex with a man; friendship would be nice, too. Sometimes
> friendship comes with the package, but I bet alot of times it doesn't.
-----------------------------
But what *I'm* telling you is that this is the fault of women and
those who concoct them that way! If you wanted to become friends
with someone wouldn't you spend time learning what they liked??
What evidence do I have that women do this with respect to men??
And don't ask me why men don't do that toward women, because the
"womanly arts" are virtually useless and unimportant, amounting to
nothing but phony fields of endeavor and phony attitudes and sick
emotional limitations! The only meat to them have coordinate male
fields of endeavor that contain real productive substance!
> > You've a twisted view of sex, as nothing more than a "lure" that
> > then you reel in, and NOT something that men will CONTINUE to enjoy
> > sharing with you periodically! Men might want variety, but they are
> > also loyal to their fuck-friends, and women in this culture are so
> > desperately needy and greedy that they refuse to "get" that! What is
> > wrong with YOU having several men you fuck often? Why don't you want
> > MORE than just ONE fuck friend?? People who only want one friend are
> > then only one person's death away from total emotional hopelessness!
>
> I do not have the twisted view of sex. You once said that if it were not for
> sex, women would be useless on this planet (is that not twisted?)
-----------------------
As currently configured, they would, sure. YOU SEE: Men could get
along fine without women if men came in both sexes!!!! They would
fuck all the time and organize sex to meet everyone's needs, they
won't be using make-up, or decorating much, or "studying fashion"
(what in the world IS that?), they wouldn't be banning nudity, or
trying to suppress sexuality and falling for shaming religious crap!
And men could LIKE them as PEOPLE!
> So, that
> means that women are good for only one thing, really, isn't that so?
---------------------
As currently configured, but then afterall that *IS* all that each sex
is good for to the other, since other than for and regarding sex, all
people are and certainly should be interchangeable!
> As far
> as the rest of what you perceive and question, long gone are the days when I
> had the "fun" of college years dating various guys and doing as I wished.
> Then I met a guy that I fell in love with and would never desire to be with
> anyone else. All those fun days and nights with different men was loads of
> fun, don't get me wrong, but then I grew up and wanted something more
> substantial in my life. I find that being with one person is very rewarding
> and enriching, and something that most people have or want.
-----------------
There's nothing really wrong with having one best friend, one life
partner, as long as it isn't sexually exclusive, because THAT is
a real sickness! Variety is the spice of life, and less than a
variety is a tragedy!
> It is not an abuse that people have suffered, either.
-----------------
Monogamy? Sure it is. You wouldn't do it if you hadn't been shamed
into it, there aren't ANY reasons to do it after you subtract all
the shaming phony reasons. If your society hadn't implied to you
that you "had to pick just one" you wouldn't have, not in such a
limited way, you may indeed have a favorite best friend, but you
guys wouldn't be limiting your sex life, you would fool around
with others at parties and then go home together, and there would
be no stigma associated with sex with others. You wouldn't even
notice it, anymore than you keep strict track of who your friend
talks to now at a party!
> It is one of the primitive and one
> of the most necessary of human needs -- companionship and LOVE. If you don't
> have love, you have a bit of loneliness, and no amount of sex can fill that
> void.
---------------
Absolutely nothing I say diminishes that, nor do I ever TRY to! But
as I have been trying to tell you, you do NOT need strict rules of
monogamous fidelity to make a partnership even BETTER than it is
that way! You wouldn't try to keep your partner at home or keep them
from having other friends, and there is NO MORE reason to keep them
from having sexual lovers either!!
Whether you come home to a tribe, or a single friend, or a combo of
those within a tribe, it is still the same need being filled. It's
no different in any way, you have simply been lied to that monogamy
is the only way to do that, in fact it is the WORST way to do that!
> That is a loneliness I would not choose to have now. That shlong of
> yours that you have had since you were eleven may have gotten you far with
> many women, but are you seriously a deeply contented man?
---------------------
I'm very happy with who I am and who I love.
> Sometimes, Steve,
> you seem like such an angry, embittered person who just wants to shove facts
> and opinions down people's throats, and I haven't quite figured out the
> reasoning behind it all. But I sure would.
>
> Susan
--------------------------------
I have a need to promote my analysis of human needs and society.
It is a passion, a hobby, a devotion, a religion that I see as a
profound contribution of mine toward the coming improvement and
the destiny of the human species.
Jacques Michel
> Jacques Michel wrote:
> >
> > But this is what they are doing, Steve. This is exactly what they are
> > doing: go around and wear a "please fuck me" sign. And nobody is
> > interested.
> -------------------
> This is nonsense. I knew a girl who wore a Ask Me to Fuck You
> button for just one day, and she was very plain looking and heavy,
> and she had a pocket full of phone numbers at the end of the day.
> She was just SO shocked that she was actually attractive to
> someone that it changed her whole life! She's doing sex therapy
> now, and has a bowl of those buttons!
>
When did that happen? In the 70s, maybe?
>
> > Just point your newsreader at alt.support.shyness,
> > alt.support.depression or soc.sexuality.general, there are at least 10
> > a day. Or go to any matchmaking service and look for yourself:
> > thousands of young males, clean, having a good job, no disease and
> > desperate enough to loose their virginity that they give sizeable
> > amounts of money just for the privilege to pass a tiny little add:
> > "looking for somebody who wants to fuck me".
> ----------------------------------
> Sure, but this is merely the result of what I call the artificial
> scarcity of sex in antisexual societies.
(snip) I agree on that. I also agree that there is something deeply
wrong in this society, but you are changing the question again. You
said: "one just has to ask for sex". I say: "plenty of men are
desperate and asking, yet not getting any". You know of a GIRL who
asked and got what she wanted and proceed to say the society is
twisted. All this is off the point: "there are plenty of men who are
asking yet not getting any". Now: tell me why they aren't getting any
and what they should do to change it.
(snip)
> I have no problem about telling women they're sexy and telling them
> that I'd love to lick their pee-pee like an ice crewam cone till they
> explode all over my tongue.
>
I call your bluff. I am sure you can do that with people who have
already signaled their willingness by being interested in, say, your
group sex experiences, but this is not the general population. But I
also know you work as an engineer and I suppose that the population
there is closer to the average. Have you tried this approach at your
present work? If yes: how many women responded positively (in number
and percentage)? If not: do it and post back. And do it without a wife
by your side, because the object of the study is not to find out what
percentage of women are interested in swinging, but what percentage of
women are interested in getting an orgasm from a randomly chosen male.
(snip)
Jacques Michel
> Wow! What are the circumstances of your life? You were born in France.
> Are you still there? I haven't been to Europe since I was a toddler,
> but I had this idea that the French were sexually liberated. Is that
> just a common myth?
>
I left France some time ago to work in Germany. Quite frankly, I don't
know what the prevalent French (or German) sexual behaviour is but I
suppose that sexual behaviour varies A LOT amongst the population. On
the one hand, the French media give the impression that being sexualy
active is prevalent, on the other hand this was never my experience in
my younger years (I am 39, so that was in the early 80s, AFTER the
"sexual revolution" that Steve has lived went out of fashion). When I
was at school (15-18), the majority of students were not in couples
and we had many girls whose idea of life was to be a secretary and
marry a rich boss (I remember very well that two flat said that,
because I was very surprised at it). Then I studied engineering and I
guess that less than 10% of the students where not sexually active.
The fact that we had less than 4% female students did not help.
Note that I posted this experience on soc.sexuality.general and a
Belgian guy responded that he left engineering, because of this very
reason: that the students there were hopelessly anal-retentive.
Another reason which makes me suspect that teen sexual behaviour
varies considerably, and maybe linked to social background is that I
noticed very different patterns amongst the teens getting out of
school. In some schools, you see that most teens (say 15-18) are in
couples when hanging out in front of the school. In others, you don't
see that pattern, you see girls and boys groups. My observation is
that the first group of school are more "working class" and the second
more "bourgeois" (but I don't spend my time hanging out in front of
schools, so that is just anecdotical evidence).
You also see schools with lots of muslim students, and they tend to
look like the second pattern, with the girls wearing a veil.
(snip)
> > Obviously, I don't want that for my children. I would rather see them
> > have social interactions that are around what is generally accepted
> > for their age. But it is not easy to steer along that line.
>
> How are you raising them that makes you expect such a miserable outlook?
> I may have missed that if it was earlier in the thread.
>
I hope I have not. The very reason I post here is that I want to avoid
them such a miserable outlook. The oldest of my childs is 11, so I
suppose that the time is right to prepare.
I am afraid to have to say that the school my children go to is not of
the "couples" type. That is another reason for concern.
(snip)
> > More seriously: sure discussing sex freely and naturally is the
> > minimum one can do (although the "naturally" part cannot be forced,
>
> It has to be forced. You must force yourself to do some, as if it were
> natural to you, when in fact you (and I!) are a product of a prudish
> society. That's what we owe to our kids.
>
I was just noting that "forced" is the contrary of "natural". I agree
that we should try to protect our kids from our hangups.
(snip)
Jacques Michel
(snip)
>
> Men are so horny that of course she had a lot of phone numbers.
This is not the whole story. There is also quite an enormous social
pressure for men to agree on direct female sexual demands. Ever
thought about that?
Now, I am not sure what this has to do with parenting, except that
maybe we should teach boys about this social pressure, I don't know.
Jacques Michel
(snip)
> Any DECENT society would have a place people could go and simply be
> guaranteed sexual release with others, where they wouldn't feel shamed
> and embarrassed to even ask for it.
>
It took me a little while to check, but the only historical example of
a such place is the brothel.
Jacques Michel
(snip)
> > > Men are so horny that of course she had a lot of phone numbers. How much
> > > easier can things get for them.
> > -------------------------
> > Ask yourself seriously why this would ever be bad???????????
>
> Because they only want one thing from her and when they get it, they toss
> her aside until the next time. I think that most women want a little more
> than just sex with a man; friendship would be nice, too. Sometimes
> friendship comes with the package, but I bet alot of times it doesn't.
>
Here you suppose that in sex, men have it better than women. You
suppose that they get what they want, and that the women does not. I
know that this is culturaly the prevalent theory (and one which
explains why men should "buy" their bride by marriage, presents and
various offers), but which is against the hypothesis taken by Steve
here. In Steve's story: the woman was asking. If she gets good
orgasms, she has a good deal.
Friendship would be icing on the cake, though.
R. Steve Walz
>
> "R. Steve Walz" <rst...@armory.com> wrote in message news:<406CE9...@armory.com>...
> > Jacques Michel wrote:
> > >
> > > But this is what they are doing, Steve. This is exactly what they are
> > > doing: go around and wear a "please fuck me" sign. And nobody is
> > > interested.
> > -------------------
> > This is nonsense. I knew a girl who wore a Ask Me to Fuck You
> > button for just one day, and she was very plain looking and heavy,
> > and she had a pocket full of phone numbers at the end of the day.
> > She was just SO shocked that she was actually attractive to
> > someone that it changed her whole life! She's doing sex therapy
> > now, and has a bowl of those buttons!
>
> When did that happen? In the 70s, maybe?
1982.
> > > Just point your newsreader at alt.support.shyness,
> > > alt.support.depression or soc.sexuality.general, there are at least 10
> > > a day. Or go to any matchmaking service and look for yourself:
> > > thousands of young males, clean, having a good job, no disease and
> > > desperate enough to loose their virginity that they give sizeable
> > > amounts of money just for the privilege to pass a tiny little add:
> > > "looking for somebody who wants to fuck me".
> > ----------------------------------
> > Sure, but this is merely the result of what I call the artificial
> > scarcity of sex in antisexual societies.
>
> (snip) I agree on that. I also agree that there is something deeply
> wrong in this society, but you are changing the question again. You
> said: "one just has to ask for sex". I say: "plenty of men are
> desperate and asking, yet not getting any".
-------------------
I see most men desperate but NOT asking.
They have been handed a climate that doesn't permit asking in the
world they support and defend.
> You know of a GIRL who
> asked and got what she wanted and proceed to say the society is
> twisted. All this is off the point: "there are plenty of men who are
> asking yet not getting any". Now: tell me why they aren't getting any
> and what they should do to change it.
-----------------------
Ask and don't stop asking, shame women into it, start organizations
that target women who don't come across sexually for group shunning
and for being shut out of business connections.
> > I have no problem about telling women they're sexy and telling them
> > that I'd love to lick their pee-pee like an ice crewam cone till they
> > explode all over my tongue.
>
> I call your bluff.
------------------------
It's no bluff, so you can't call it. I said it to a woman I met
this morning, and she just giggled and said thanks. They don't
always take it seriously, but they always get a kick out of it.
It makes their whole day.
> I am sure you can do that with people who have
> already signaled their willingness by being interested in, say, your
> group sex experiences, but this is not the general population. But I
> also know you work as an engineer and I suppose that the population
> there is closer to the average. Have you tried this approach at your
> present work?
----------------------
I do several things, not just engineering. Some things I do pay
lots of money, so I do them sometimes for the money, and some
things like electronics are totally ruined by making them a grind,
so I only take jobs I like and can have total control without
question and only if I really LIKE them. And some things I do
resemble volunteer work, but they are more fun. This morning
was fun!
> If yes: how many women responded positively (in number
> and percentage)? If not: do it and post back. And do it without
> a wife by your side,
----------------------
We're not curently married. She doesn't even live in town.
> because the object of the study is not to find out what
> percentage of women are interested in swinging, but what percentage of
> women are interested in getting an orgasm from a randomly chosen male.
-----------------------------------
Oh, randomly is not the case either, random ones don't ask!
Asking MAKES you special!
Steve
Alina
> If you don't have sexual development at the right age, there is no way
> you can catch up afterwards.
Hm, I'll have to believe you on that one, due to my own lack of
parenting experience. BUT (always a but): there is no such thing as a
"right age", I think. As any other milestone in a person's
development, to each his own, right? Now, if kids are prevented from
doing what is natural to them but seems immoral to their parents, then
there is damage done. However, if kids are let alone to follow their
own path and don't "fool around" at what we think is the right age...
well it's their way, they'll do it when they feel like it, or maybe
even never and jump straight into adult sex.
>
> To summarize what I have seen happen:
> -children who wait till 15-17 to make their first exploratory moves (...)
> awkward (...)
Maybe. Yet you can't expect every teenager to feel like a fish in the
water about every aspect of their life among other teens. Or adults
among adults of kids among kids, etc. Everybody has weaknesses and
soft spots, and we all are bound to feel awkward sometime someplace.
It's not a bad thing.
> -they end up ostracized by their peers
Maybe. If so, they'll have a tougher challenge finding their place
within their social environment, but a smart and prepared kid will
succeed.
> -this behaviour further prevents them of having social interactions
> that would be normal at their age and the parents cannot compensate
Do you think so? What is "normal"? Is being different from the most
common bad?
> -the vicious circle may be broken at a later age (say 18-25, sometimes
> as late as 40) by the young adult giving himself to an abusive person (...)
I hope you are wrong. I can't say you are, but this all seems a bit
far fetched to me.
> Obviously, I don't want that for my children. I would rather see them
> have social interactions that are around what is generally accepted
> for their age. But it is not easy to steer along that line.
Trust them a bit more! I have been in this ng a very short time, and
from the few posts I have read written by you, I have a general idea
that you *are* giving your kid(s) the necessary tools to face the
challenges life will have for them.
> yet were completely
> blocked about it. It actually made the frustration worse.
Let me pull a Rsteve here: I think that could be due to their parent's
attitude about it. Maybe they studied a lot about sex in school but at
home sex was a taboo and therefore they grew up blocking it because
they were taught to repress their sexual drive and curiosity. Or maybe
their parents *tried* to be natural about it, but still gave a double
message. Remember how this thread started? Pip, the original poster,
told her girl "there is nothing wrong with kissing but don't do it".
I'M NOT SAYING PIP WILL DAMAGE HER DAUGHTER IN ANY WAY. It is just an
example of a double message given by a good intentioned parent. When
it comes to sex, many parents will really try, but fail, to be
natural, because they themselves are quite blocked.
...
Gee, I guess I'm rambling again. Sorry. Just put baby to sleep after a
looooong, weary day.
Alina.
Sue Larson
> > they toss her aside until the next time.
> ------------------
> And did you think he should stay and do her hair or what?
will give her pleasure. That is all they are good for, after all.
The girls I love don't
> diet much, are typically broader plumper hairier women with big
> droopy tits, huge nipples, and soft shoulders, and I love that!
Do they bathe?
> There's nothing really wrong with having one best friend, one life
> partner, as long as it isn't sexually exclusive, because THAT is
> a real sickness! Variety is the spice of life, and less than a
> variety is a tragedy!
>
THAT, my friend, is simply your opinion. No more, no less. You stick with
your daily romps with your hairy, droopy female friends and hairy, droopy
male lovers and I will carry on my life as it is. By the way, with a
husband, household to manage, school, and two kids, when in the world do you
even think I would have time to arrange these gatherings that you think I
need to have to "normalize" my life? I am wondering, have your children
opened up their marriages to have sex with many others, other than their
spouses, as you have? Did you always have these other lovers in your home
while your kids were young? I chuckle as I imagine you answer the door to a
woman, take her to the bedroom (or chandelier?) for one of your romps, while
the young kids are working on their homework and your wife is cooking
dinner. Or, was it much different than that?
Susan
Susan
"R. Steve Walz" <rst...@armory.com> wrote in message
news:406E35...@armory.com...
> Sue Larson wrote:
> >
> > > Some people are just heavy, but they often get heavier in our culture
> > > directly as a compensation for sexual poverty.
> >
> > Or to ward men off because of earlier abuse by some man.
> -------------------
> Most of this imagined male "abuse" amounts to not marrying them
> immediately after their first sex. These women are deluded and so
> shamed that some don't even use sex properly as they should for
> pleasure. And then they fantasize that they are "damaged goods"
> if some guy doesn't call right away or the next day! Or they
> don't like being fondled in public, or wearing sexually revealing
> clothing for what it was intended for, access!!
>
>
> > > > Men are so horny that of course she had a lot of phone numbers. How
much
> > > > easier can things get for them.
> > > -------------------------
> > > Ask yourself seriously why this would ever be bad???????????
> >
Many of
> these women as currently configured do NOT often make good friends
> for men, they are too needy and greedy, irrational and lack proper
> respectful accountability to others. They were overly pampered on
> one hand and shamed and guilted on the other and are psychologically
> defective! The way MANY women today are programmed, most men can't
> STAND them for long!
>
> Really, what was it that you thought they can do together besides
> fuck? Talk over recipes, decorating or make-over tips? Should
> they build a deck? Why NOT agree to get together just to have
> sex again in a couple days?? They have nothing else in common!
> That's the nature of the gender-GULF that this society produces
> by abusively shaming and controlling and trying to de-sex young
> women!!
>
> It's not that the women *I* know and fuck aren't suitable friends
> for ME, but I know that amounts to a small minority of women, the
> women *I* know are rather "butch" tom-boys, they like making things,
> and fixing things, and watching porn, hackneyed sick wacko cult
> movies, and eating fatty foods! They don't shave their legs and
> they don't do make-up except on Halloween! If it weren't for the
> fact that they adore as many cocks as they can get, they'd be
> Lesbians, and a couple ARE quite bisexual!! >
>
Alina
> I'm not at all convinced by your anecdotal evidence. I know lots of
> people who started young and started late. And I know people who are
> messed up about sex and others who are sexually healthy. And I'm not
> seeing the pattern you describe.
It must depend on a wide number of factors, not only the starting age,
also parent's attitude towards sex, sexual education at school, social
environment, a person's own self-esteem and security...
> Sure. Anyone new to anything is awkward. That goes away pretty fast.
> The great thing about sex is that once you do discover it, you
> invariably want to practice all the time.
That too will vary much from one person to another, won't it?
> Look, I was ostracized by my peers because I didn't know how to get
> along with kids.
Same here. It happens all the time to may kids and for many reasons.
And It is not bad or a sign of doom, I think. It is just another
challenge to face in life.
> No, I think those girls have been shamed into _actually_ believing that
> from before the time when they might have started sexploration on their
> own. I don't think it's generally a defense mechanism. And there are
> boys in exactly the same boat.
I totally agree to that. I live in a horribly ultra-catholic society.
A lot of the girls I've known (classmates, neighbours, friends... )
don't even think about it, it's just the way it is: you remain a
virgin and get properly married.
> He's right, though! It's the rest of us who have the door fetishes.
> Seriously, why should we take sexual privacy to such an extreme? There
> may be some deem genetic programming to procreate in a protected
> environment because you're somewhat vulnerable while in the process.
> But geez, can't we get over it?
Maybe. But there is nothing wrong with wanting privacy. I think of sex
as an itimate thing, I enjoy it with my partner, I don't think I'd
like a menage-a-trois (however that is spelled), or an audience. I'd
be distracted by people passing by. It is not that we should hide, but
rather that if we want to be alone, we have a right to.
> It has to be forced. You must force yourself to do some, as if it were
> natural to you, when in fact you (and I!) are a product of a prudish
> society. That's what we owe to our kids.
But you cant' force a prude parent to act naturally when he/she
doesn't feel that way. They have to first free themselves from their
taboos and complexes, and to do that, they have to believe it is
necessary, which in most cases the same taboos and complexes prevent.
At least it is the case for a lot of people here in my ultra-catholic
society.
Alina.
Jacques Michel
> Jacques Michel wrote:
> >
> > "R. Steve Walz" <rst...@armory.com> wrote in message news:<406CE9...@armory.com>...
> > > Jacques Michel wrote:
> > > >
> > > > But this is what they are doing, Steve. This is exactly what they are
> > > > doing: go around and wear a "please fuck me" sign. And nobody is
> > > > interested.
> > > -------------------
> > > This is nonsense. I knew a girl who wore a Ask Me to Fuck You
> > > button for just one day, and she was very plain looking and heavy,
> > > and she had a pocket full of phone numbers at the end of the day.
> > > She was just SO shocked that she was actually attractive to
> > > someone that it changed her whole life! She's doing sex therapy
> > > now, and has a bowl of those buttons!
> >
> > When did that happen? In the 70s, maybe?
> ------------
> 1982.
>
22 years ago, 2 years after your divorce.
(snip)
>
> > > I have no problem about telling women they're sexy and telling them
> > > that I'd love to lick their pee-pee like an ice crewam cone till they
> > > explode all over my tongue.
> >
> > I call your bluff.
> ------------------------
> It's no bluff, so you can't call it. I said it to a woman I met
> this morning, and she just giggled and said thanks. They don't
> always take it seriously, but they always get a kick out of it.
> It makes their whole day.
>
Bluff. You did not lick her.
(snip)
Jacques Michel
>
> > Look, I was ostracized by my peers because I didn't know how to get
> > along with kids.
>
> Same here. It happens all the time to may kids and for many reasons.
> And It is not bad or a sign of doom, I think. It is just another
> challenge to face in life.
>
Maybe, but then the parents should know how to handle it (after all
this a parenting newsgroup). So how would you approach this challenge?
> > No, I think those girls have been shamed into _actually_ believing that
> > from before the time when they might have started sexploration on their
> > own. I don't think it's generally a defense mechanism. And there are
> > boys in exactly the same boat.
>
> I totally agree to that. I live in a horribly ultra-catholic society.
> A lot of the girls I've known (classmates, neighbours, friends... )
> don't even think about it, it's just the way it is: you remain a
> virgin and get properly married.
>
In my experience, the idea that you should stay a virgin also helps
them rationalising the lack of sexual experience. But you are right
that it is hard to tell.
(snip)
>
> > It has to be forced. You must force yourself to do some, as if it were
> > natural to you, when in fact you (and I!) are a product of a prudish
> > society. That's what we owe to our kids.
>
> But you cant' force a prude parent to act naturally when he/she
> doesn't feel that way. They have to first free themselves from their
> taboos and complexes, and to do that, they have to believe it is
> necessary, which in most cases the same taboos and complexes prevent.
> At least it is the case for a lot of people here in my ultra-catholic
> society.
>
Yes. But what I wanted to say is that "forcing" and "natural" don't go
very well together. If you force yourself, and unless you are a
brilliant actor, the kids will know. Maybe it is better to tell them
that you thought differently when you were younger but that times have
changed and that you know now that you were wrong? At least it is less
of a lie.
Christopher Weeks
>>>Look, I was ostracized by my peers because I didn't know how to get
>>>along with kids.
>>
>>Same here. It happens all the time to may kids and for many reasons.
>>And It is not bad or a sign of doom, I think. It is just another
>>challenge to face in life.
>
> Maybe, but then the parents should know how to handle it (after all
> this a parenting newsgroup). So how would you approach this challenge?
There is no "way to handle it." You love them and teach them and hang
with them and commiserate with them. They deal with it. In my case, I
started playing war games with adults when I was around ten or eleven.
There was a group of mostly 30-something, mostly men who got together
weekly to play a variety of war simulations and they welcomed me once it
was clear that even as a child I was capable of keeping up (and whooping
ass, sometimes :-) I don't know what other kids would do. My parents
were clueful enough to let me do something that was weird. Many parents
aren't.
>>>It has to be forced. You must force yourself to do some, as if it were
>>>natural to you, when in fact you (and I!) are a product of a prudish
>>>society. That's what we owe to our kids.
>>
>>But you cant' force a prude parent to act naturally when he/she
>>doesn't feel that way. They have to first free themselves from their
>>taboos and complexes, and to do that, they have to believe it is
>>necessary, which in most cases the same taboos and complexes prevent.
>>At least it is the case for a lot of people here in my ultra-catholic
>>society.
>
> Yes. But what I wanted to say is that "forcing" and "natural" don't go
> very well together. If you force yourself, and unless you are a
> brilliant actor, the kids will know. Maybe it is better to tell them
> that you thought differently when you were younger but that times have
> changed and that you know now that you were wrong? At least it is less
> of a lie.
If you start forcing yourself when the child is born, and you are really
ernest about the goals, then I bet you'll have largely straightened out
your hang-ups by the time the charade would be obvious.
Chris
R. Steve Walz
>
> > > Because they only want one thing from her and when they get it,
> > > they toss her aside until the next time.
> > ------------------
> > And did you think he should stay and do her hair or what?
> Absolutely. After pleasuring a woman, a man should do anything else that
> will give her pleasure. That is all they are good for, after all.
Hahahahahahah!!!
> > The girls I love don't
> > diet much, are typically broader plumper hairier women with big
> > droopy tits, huge nipples, and soft shoulders, and I love that!
>
> Do they bathe?
------------------------------
Some do, some not daily.
> > There's nothing really wrong with having one best friend, one life
> > partner, as long as it isn't sexually exclusive, because THAT is
> > a real sickness! Variety is the spice of life, and less than a
> > variety is a tragedy!
> >
> THAT, my friend, is simply your opinion. No more, no less.
--------------------------
However, some opinions also happen to be the Truth.
> You stick with
> your daily romps with your hairy, droopy female friends and hairy, droopy
> male lovers and I will carry on my life as it is.
-------------------
Hahahahahah!
> By the way, with a
> husband, household to manage, school, and two kids, when in the world do you
> even think I would have time to arrange these gatherings that you think I
> need to have to "normalize" my life?
-------------------
Maybe you need to slow down.
> I am wondering, have your children
> opened up their marriages to have sex with many others, other than their
> spouses, as you have?
----------------------
Sure.
> Did you always have these other lovers in your home
> while your kids were young?
---------------------
Yup.
>I chuckle as I imagine you answer the door to a
> woman, take her to the bedroom (or chandelier?) for one of your romps, while
> the young kids are working on their homework and your wife is cooking
> dinner. Or, was it much different than that?
> Susan
---------------------
Nope. And as often as not the kids were having their OWN "romp".
R. Steve Walz
What a waste!
> > He's right, though! It's the rest of us who have the door fetishes.
> > Seriously, why should we take sexual privacy to such an extreme? There
> > may be some deem genetic programming to procreate in a protected
> > environment because you're somewhat vulnerable while in the process.
> > But geez, can't we get over it?
>
> Maybe. But there is nothing wrong with wanting privacy.
---------------
Of COURSE there is, but because there's something wrong with YOU,
you don't want to believe it. Once you do the ultimate violation
of privacy, YOU are "innoculated", and you never actually need it
for YOURSELF EVER AGAIN!!
> I think of sex
> as an itimate thing, I enjoy it with my partner, I don't think I'd
> like a menage-a-trois (however that is spelled), or an audience.
------------------
Fear of public speaking, public performance is a biggee, but it's
just not that way with sex unless you're doing it on stage, that is,
whomever you take on having sex with you are automatically close to
and they are revealed themselves, so you don't feel like the center
of attention. The intimacy comes from the sex, if you care about the
other person. Some vicious persons are not suited to it, and need
re-programming by professionals, but most people are perfectly able
to do this.
> I'd
> be distracted by people passing by. It is not that we should hide, but
> rather that if we want to be alone, we have a right to.
---------------------
Actually, if you are in a place where you are supposed to be having
groupsex, someone passing by ould only be someone who is supposed to,
and it would not distract you, you wouldn't notice it or be sidetracked
by it.
> > It has to be forced. You must force yourself to do some, as if it were
> > natural to you, when in fact you (and I!) are a product of a prudish
> > society. That's what we owe to our kids.
>
> But you cant' force a prude parent to act naturally when he/she
> doesn't feel that way. They have to first free themselves from their
> taboos and complexes, and to do that, they have to believe it is
> necessary, which in most cases the same taboos and complexes prevent.
> At least it is the case for a lot of people here in my ultra-catholic
> society.
>
> Alina.
---------------------
That's only the way it SEEMS like it MUST be to you in your oppressive
society. But here's the Truth: They LIED TO YOU ABOUT THAT TOO!
And this sense of whether it is "necessary" is ALSO just a phony
block that they have placed in your MIND! These fears are a kind
of thin veneer that makes you think it is hard all the way through
but which cracks and falls away literally at nothing but the very
slightest touch!!!
Actually, people get more familiar with exposure, and trying to become
prepared for it really does no good at all, like stepping out on a
nude beach for the first time, it simply takes a little while, but
very shortly you find yourself bouncing around and you suddenly think
to yourself, "I never knew I could be so okay wih this!!"!
And then someone asks you to come and fuck, and your nervousness
starts all over again, but again, once you've done it you again
have that very wonderful mental epiphany and you say to yourself:
"I never knew I could feel so perfectly alright with this, I just
came on a guy's tongue I barely know and in front of six other
people licking and sucking on me, and I REALLY LOVED IT! And
then three guys fucked me one after the other and I sucked them
at the same time, and all it did was make me so unbelievably HORNY!"
And it's like virginity, it never "hurts" again after the first
time, it just always feels wonderful!
Steve
R. Steve Walz
>
> Yes. But what I wanted to say is that "forcing" and "natural" don't go
> very well together. If you force yourself, and unless you are a
> brilliant actor, the kids will know. Maybe it is better to tell them
> that you thought differently when you were younger but that times have
> changed and that you know now that you were wrong? At least it is less
> of a lie.
Sure.
Forcing is in no way acting, it is doing it ANYWAY, even if you feel
nervous, and then discovering the reality, that you NEVER ACTUALLY
HAD TO BE nervous, you just THOUGHT that you would be, and that you
have found that were WRONG!
Steve
R. Steve Walz
>
> "R. Steve Walz" <rst...@armory.com> wrote in message news:<406F29...@armory.com>...
> > Jacques Michel wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > But this is what they are doing, Steve. This is exactly what they are
> > > > > doing: go around and wear a "please fuck me" sign. And nobody is
> > > > > interested.
> > > > -------------------
> > > > This is nonsense. I knew a girl who wore a Ask Me to Fuck You
> > > > button for just one day, and she was very plain looking and heavy,
> > > > and she had a pocket full of phone numbers at the end of the day.
> > > > She was just SO shocked that she was actually attractive to
> > > > someone that it changed her whole life! She's doing sex therapy
> > > > now, and has a bowl of those buttons!
> > >
> > > When did that happen? In the 70s, maybe?
> > ------------
> > 1982.
>
> 22 years ago, 2 years after your divorce.
No, we were divorced in 1989.
Where did you get the idea that we were divorced in 1980?
Go look up the divorce decree in Santa Cruz County, sil vous plait.
> > > > I have no problem about telling women they're sexy and telling them
> > > > that I'd love to lick their pee-pee like an ice crewam cone till they
> > > > explode all over my tongue.
> > >
> > > I call your bluff.
> > ------------------------
> > It's no bluff, so you can't call it. I said it to a woman I met
> > this morning, and she just giggled and said thanks. They don't
> > always take it seriously, but they always get a kick out of it.
> > It makes their whole day.
> >
>
> Bluff. You did not lick her.
--------------------
I wasn't asked to.
So what?
You're acting very weird today!
Steve
greccogirl
R. Steve Walz wrote:
>Sue Larson wrote:
>
>
>>Would you let your child learn to ride a bicycle alone
>>
>>
>>>without a helmet, and make her do it on the freeway?
>>>Steve
>>>
>>>
>>To sum it all up, as you did, my point is no, I would not let my child learn
>>to ride a bicycle alone without a helmet and make her do it on the freeway.
>>Nor would I talk to my five year old daughter about getting up on a man's 20
>>speed bike to ride it when she was not physically able, even if I ran behind
>>her. However, if she picked out an appropriate bike that she felt
>>comfortable riding because she knew and felt it was her size and speed, then
>>I would support her. Big difference.
>>
>>Susan
>>
>>
>------------------------
>Support her no matter what. Then you are loving her.
>If she wants to try a man's 20-speed, let her.
>
>If you're right, she'll find out, and hear you
>all the better in the future, and without hating you.
>Steve
>
Steve, when those scars are healing from her accident, she'll not hate you.
>
>
>
>>"R. Steve Walz" <rst...@armory.com> wrote in message
>>news:406A99...@armory.com...
>>
>>
>>>Sue Larson wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Why wouldn't my friends be "starting" and my family be branching out?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>It IS "incest" supposedly, doesn't that label titillate you?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>More than you can possibly imagine.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>And so what is it that you imagine she means, if this isn't sexual???
>>>>>Why would she bother?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>Of course, she is beginning to take notice of boys in a different way
>>>>
>>>>
>>than
>>
>>
>>>>she has before, but it will be of her own time. Shall I go ahead and buy
>>>>
>>>>
>>her
>>
>>
>>>>a box of condoms every time she points out a good looking kid?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>---------------------------
>>>The first time, and every year thereafter.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>But she has been successfully shamed by your expectations for her and
>>>>>what you have not provided for her, and by society. Why would she
>>>>>tell you such a thing, she knows better!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>You couldn't be more wrong. If I sat around the house making points ten
>>>>times a day about sex and the human being, she probably would jump
>>>>
>>>>
>>further
>>
>>
>>>>ahead. What would my point be to do that though? To expose her earlier
>>>>
>>>>
>>so
>>
>>
>>>>she can get a head start, probably.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>-----------------
>>>Head Start is an educational program to benefit kids, this is no
>>>different.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>That, in my view, is called manipulation.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>------------------
>>>If you have respected your kid's rights to her own choices then
>>>she'll tell you if you're too pushy, she does with everything else,
>>>doesn't she? Talking is not manipulation, that notion is just an
>>>"out" that prudish parents use to avoid doing the proper job.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>My daughter knows alot about sex and everything that goes
>>>>along with it, plus knows a whole lot more than alot of her friends
>>>>
>>>>
>>(whose
>>
>>
>>>>parents insist on telling them that sex means kissing).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>--------------------------
>>>Does she know everything? if not why not.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>When she is ready,
>>>>she will know it, and that is her decision and not my place to >
>>>>
>>>>
>>manipulate.
>>
>>
>>>----------------------------
>>>Nonsense, in a new situation with a newly grown body we do not
>>>know what we want until we are given a menu. Give her the menu.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>Nonsense, this is your stupidity speaking. Everyone WANTS precisely
>>>>>what they fantasize about, nothing less!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>Thank you, sir.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>------------------
>>>Why else would they fantasize at all?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>If you make it available, you're not pushing it.
>>>>>If you tell a kid they can have sex in their room if they want,
>>>>>then they know that into the future. They know that you are safe
>>>>>about it, both to talk to, and not to interfere with their life.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>It IS available to her. She has asked me multiple questions already (and
>>>>
>>>>
>>she
>>
>>
>>>>has plenty of reading material, too). Shall I tell her that she can have
>>>>
>>>>
>>the
>>
>>
>>>>next boy over in her room that she thinks is cute?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>--------------------------
>>>Yes. She assumes she can't unless you tell her otherwise, unless of
>>>course that's what you WANT her to think, and leave you deniable
>>>about your antisexual oppression!!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>She is pretty comfortable
>>>>the way she is now so I would be foolish to indirectly push anything on
>>>>
>>>>
>>her
>>
>>
>>>>that she did not come up with on her own. (aka exposure, manipulation,
>>>>
>>>>
>>etc.)
>>
>>
>>>------------------------------
>>>You're just trying to utilize her ignorance to manipulate her away
>>>from sex in a manner that leaves you deniable!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>No, this was entirely unbeknownst to our parents. My parents would
>>>>>have probably told me it was alright, but warned me that other parents
>>>>>would become insane about it, and they'd have been right
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>Hey, as long as it worked for all of you, buddy.....
>>>>
>>>>Susan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>----------------------------------
>>>Sure, but that was the best we could do, and we were accidentally
>>>very lucky and also exceptionally informed, me at 11 and my 14 y/o
>>>g/f, that is. I had hunted up the library books in the adult section,
>>>courtesy of my grandfather's library card, and she had read everything
>>>she could.
>>>
>>>Your daughter is faced with intercourse, disease, and etc., and you
>>>owe her NOT ONLLY complete information, but also the SAFEST sexual
>>>outlet and venue for it that you can provide so that you KNOW she
>>>is as safe as she CAN be AND as satisfied as she WANTS to be!
>>>
>>>Anything less leaves her subject to potential danger doing this
>>>on her own! >
>>>
>>>
R. Steve Walz
>
> R. Steve Walz wrote:
>
> >Sue Larson wrote:
> >
> >>Would you let your child learn to ride a bicycle alone
> >>
> >>>without a helmet, and make her do it on the freeway?
> >>>Steve
> >>>
> >>To sum it all up, as you did, my point is no, I would not let my child learn
> >>to ride a bicycle alone without a helmet and make her do it on the freeway.
> >>Nor would I talk to my five year old daughter about getting up on a man's 20
> >>speed bike to ride it when she was not physically able, even if I ran behind
> >>her. However, if she picked out an appropriate bike that she felt
> >>comfortable riding because she knew and felt it was her size and speed, then
> >>I would support her. Big difference.
> >>
> >>Susan
> >------------------------
> >Support her no matter what. Then you are loving her.
> >If she wants to try a man's 20-speed, let her.
> >
> >If you're right, she'll find out, and hear you
> >all the better in the future, and without hating you.
> >Steve
>
> Steve, when those scars are healing from her accident,
> she'll not hate you.
Not if you warned her.
And she'll know you're reliable.
Steve
Jacques Michel
> jak...@yahoo.com (Jacques Michel) wrote in message news:<5e2ca8a5.04040...@posting.google.com>...
> > If you don't have sexual development at the right age, there is no way
> > you can catch up afterwards.
>
> Hm, I'll have to believe you on that one, due to my own lack of
> parenting experience. BUT (always a but): there is no such thing as a
> "right age", I think. As any other milestone in a person's
> development, to each his own, right? Now, if kids are prevented from
> doing what is natural to them but seems immoral to their parents, then
> there is damage done. However, if kids are let alone to follow their
> own path and don't "fool around" at what we think is the right age...
> well it's their way, they'll do it when they feel like it, or maybe
> even never and jump straight into adult sex.
>
Yes and no. It is true that children vary in the way and age at which
they evolve. OTOH, it is also true that all humans follow a similar
developing path. I'll take an example you are more familiar with: you
have a baby, you know that he is supposed to start walking around
12-18 months, start talking around 2 years, etc. If this does not
happen, you'll go and see a doctor because something is wrong. This
programmed development continues for the whole of human life. Children
change around 7 (forgetting babies memories around that time), then
puberty starts around 9-13 with the obvious associated changes, then
they go to subsequent phases as adults and elders. For example it is
quite common for people around 70-80 to have higher anxiety, because
the levels or serotonin in the brain start to decline.
Obviously, the age at which those changes happen vary according to the
individual. For example, some elders never show anxiety, some children
speak as early as one year and some as late as four, and some children
start puberty at 7 while some wait till 15, so that the parents should
adapt to bring them what they need at the age when they need it. But
the ORDER of those changes is much more constant. So there is no
"right age" per se, indeed, but there is a "right" order of
development.
Now, what we are talking about (teens sexual development) is, per
essence, social interactions. And there is only so much one can do,
because you have to adapt to the environment as well, even if you are
ready much earlier or much later. Taking a non-sexual example: a child
that is late for the intellectual development associated with reading
will suffer for at least a few years in today's school system.
Likewise a child that is very early or very late in his/her sexual
development will see him/herself unadapted to normal interactions with
their classmates.
I have seen this happen. I have seen a 6-year old boy who was very
interested in kissing girls (not more than that) and the girls
ostracised him because they were not interested in that at that age. I
suppose that children who are late bloomers in a society of -how can I
say that- teens "fooling around", dating and forming couples, that
those children will also be ostracised. Especially since there is
quite a large amount of competition at that game.
> >
> > To summarize what I have seen happen:
> > -children who wait till 15-17 to make their first exploratory moves (...)
> > awkward (...)
>
> Maybe. Yet you can't expect every teenager to feel like a fish in the
> water about every aspect of their life among other teens. Or adults
> among adults of kids among kids, etc. Everybody has weaknesses and
> soft spots, and we all are bound to feel awkward sometime someplace.
> It's not a bad thing.
>
I can't expect every child to grow smoothly, but I consider it part of
the necessary education parents must give to their children to teach
them how to deal with the problem of "not feeling like a fish in the
water". How can I make this be understood? I was a child that felt
this way and my parents had the typical attitude "just wait and it
will solve itself" and this DOES NOT WORK. Look for yourself in the
newsgroups devoted to this kind of problems, there are large numbers
of late teens and young adults who are literally desperate. What do
you do to avoid that as a parent? Isn't that a reasonable question as
a parent? Isn't that a problem serious enough to be discussed in a
parenting newsgroup?
> > -they end up ostracized by their peers
>
> Maybe. If so, they'll have a tougher challenge finding their place
> within their social environment, but a smart and prepared kid will
> succeed.
>
See above. How do you prepare them?
> > -this behaviour further prevents them of having social interactions
> > that would be normal at their age and the parents cannot compensate
>
> Do you think so? What is "normal"? Is being different from the most
> common bad?
>
Being hindered in one's social interactions is bad, certainly. Note
that the expression being "different" has a double meaning. You can be
"different" if you don't want to agree or adhere to one or more of the
prevalent social dogmas. Liking classical music instead of the
prevalent pop/rock culture is being "different" for a kid, for
example. That's ok, even positive in many cases. You can also be
"different" if you are rejected by your peer. The class slut just as
much as the class nerd are "different" in that sense.
What is normal? I post because I want to find out. I have no clear
idea, because I was not a "normal" teen. Let me see:
-starting sex at 11, group sex commune, and having sex in front of
your kids: not "normal", in the sense that it is not a prevalent
practice in todays western society. Maybe it would be a good idea, but
that is another question.
-extreme religious bigotry, keeping yourself a virgin till marriage,
etc: not "normal" (unless you live in a such community, in which case
I would advise moving...). I also think it is a generally bad idea:
please consider that when the idea of virgin brides was started, girls
got married between 15 and 18 and boys little later than that. Any
girl unwed at 24 was considered a major problem for the whole village
to solve (it happened to one of my grandmothers and I was told they
had special ceremonies in that case, etc...).
I believe that "normal" in our society means: starting masturbating
between 11 and 13, starting first relationships and dating between 12
and 14 (kissing, fondling), starting sex (mutual masturbation, oral
sex or intercourse) between 15 and 18, maybe have a series of 2-5
relationships betwen that age and the age at which you end your study
(which can be between 18 and 28 where I live), then start a familly
and children. But I don't really know what happens to normal teens
between 10 and 18 and I am interested in other peoples' opinion. To
take one of the examples that was given here: is mutual sexual
exploration at age 11 normal (in the sense that it is prevalent or in
the sense that it is a necessary step in chidren development)?
> > -the vicious circle may be broken at a later age (say 18-25, sometimes
> > as late as 40) by the young adult giving himself to an abusive person (...)
>
> I hope you are wrong. I can't say you are, but this all seems a bit
> far fetched to me.
>
You said you hope I am wrong, I understand that you hope that my and
your children will not choose this path. So do I. But I have seen this
behaviour very often around me. Then, indeed, I do not live in a
"normal" environment in the sense that most of the people I know are
either bigots (and I tend to avoid those nowadays) or
engineers/academics (and those seem to have done exactly that with
their life). I am sorry, people may not believe me, but this is what I
see around me. Is it a wonder that I am looking for a different source
of information?
> > Obviously, I don't want that for my children. I would rather see them
> > have social interactions that are around what is generally accepted
> > for their age. But it is not easy to steer along that line.
>
> Trust them a bit more! I have been in this ng a very short time, and
> from the few posts I have read written by you, I have a general idea
> that you *are* giving your kid(s) the necessary tools to face the
> challenges life will have for them.
>
I do trust my children, but I also want them to choose a path to a
happy life. And trust is not enough. You don't trust your children to
learn to read, just saying "you are a bright child, this is a book,
figure it out", you TEACH them. Social interactions are just the same,
yet my parents did NOT teach me anything, they were quite content that
I was devoting my time to study instead of fooling around and
"trusted" that the problem will solve itself with time. Well, this did
not work.
The only positive thing is that, since my parents gave me no
information whatsoever about sexual interactions, they also mostly
failed to get the message through that "sex is evil". This is the
reason why I am interested by liberal theories, while I would probably
be in the bigot clan, like some active posters of this group, if they
had succeded.
> > yet were completely
> > blocked about it. It actually made the frustration worse.
>
> Let me pull a Rsteve here: I think that could be due to their parent's
> attitude about it. Maybe they studied a lot about sex in school but at
> home sex was a taboo and therefore they grew up blocking it because
> they were taught to repress their sexual drive and curiosity. Or maybe
> their parents *tried* to be natural about it, but still gave a double
> message. Remember how this thread started? Pip, the original poster,
> told her girl "there is nothing wrong with kissing but don't do it".
> I'M NOT SAYING PIP WILL DAMAGE HER DAUGHTER IN ANY WAY. It is just an
> example of a double message given by a good intentioned parent. When
> it comes to sex, many parents will really try, but fail, to be
> natural, because they themselves are quite blocked.
>
>
What you say is both right and interesting, but unrelated to what I
meant. I mean that, when you are a 17 year old teen that cannot find
anybody who wants to date you, reading that the average age at which
teens have their first intercourse is 15 makes you feel sorry for
yourself. That is what I meant by "making the frustration worse".
Please note that the problem of "not finding anybody who wants to date
you" plagues males just as well as females. Social interactions are
very competitive, and in any competition there are loosers. I want to
help my kids not to be in the looser camp.
Now, if you excuse me when I vent some of my frustration (not from
you, sorry) at posting here for this kind of help: what is it that is
wrong with you, people? Can't you bloody see that this society has a
problem? Don't you know that suicide is the number 1 cause of
mortality for kids? Don't you know that depression is a major health
issue in the developed world? Haven't anyone but me tried pointing
their newsreaders to teens self help groups and see the hordes of
desperate teens that post "I get no sex"? Isn't there anybody besides
an old, sad hippie that lives by the memories of 30 years old wacko
experiences to at least have something moderately entertaining to say
on the subject? Isn't it normal, as a parent, to try to teach our
children to avoid failing their lifes?
Sorry again, Alina, it was not for you, but I least I feel a bit
better now.
>
> Gee, I guess I'm rambling again. Sorry. Just put baby to sleep after a
> looooong, weary day.
>
It's been a few years, but I can still relate to that. ;-)
m...@me.net
school. When I asked them where they got the idea to do that, they said they
saw it on TV, or in a magazine.
I told them that those behaviors are for grown ups only, and not for kids of
their age. I didn't try to run a guilt trip or say that it was dirty or
bad, but to keep it simple I said that it was something that grown-ups do
when they are ready to start a family, and they are not grown up yet. When I
caught them doing it again, I put them on time-out, and explained again that
it's inappropriate behavior for their age. I didn't give them more
information than they needed to know or go into explaining what sex was -
kids are naturally curious and will try anything you tell them about. I
explained that when they are adults they are free to engage in whatever of
those activities they want, but while they are kids they are not allowed -
period. I explained that if they continued, I'd have to tell their parents
and they would be permanently separated. That pretty much put an end to it.
"greccogirl" <grecc...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4066161F...@yahoo.com...
> That was my first thought. Experts will tell you that this kind of
> behavior does usually come from girls who are being molested by an adult
> or an older child.
>
> dragonlady wrote:
>
> >In article <0cdef37783f80f09...@news.bubbanews.com>,
> > "Pip" <som...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>Hi all,
> >>
> >>I have a bit of a problem that I'm not sure how to handle, my daughter
is 7
> >>1/2 and plays a lot with another girl who is 7. The problem is that I
keep
> >>catching them kissing quite passionately. When I find them doing this I
back
> >>away and call my daughter from out of site for what ever it was I wanted
her
> >>for.
> >>
> >>This first started last summer I was upstairs and saw them from the
window
> >>the other girl L was led on top of my girl A. I made some noise to
distract
> >>them and they stopped but then went in the play house and were doing it
> >>there. I made some excuse to split them up and had a word with A about
it
> >>( A has slight learning difficulties and has the mental age of a 5/6 yo)
I
> >>talked about it as tho it wasn't a problem and she openly told me about
it
> >>and said it had been L's idea. I said there was nothing wrong with
kissing
> >>but that the way they were kissing is really for grown ups and that I'd
> >>prefer it if they didn't do it, she replied that she really enjoyed
doing it
> >>and didn't want to stop.
> >>
> >>Then she went through a phase of not playing with L that much but they
have
> >>started playing again recently, today I have seen them doing it 3 times.
> >>
> >>I really don't know what to do about it, I don't want her to think that
it
> >>is dirty or wrong. I don't have a problem that it is a girl she is
kissing
> >>like that, it's the fact she is kissing anyone like that, that makes me
feel
> >>uncomfortable.
> >>
> >>Any advice on this matter would be gratefully appreciated.
> >>
> >>Pip.x
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >My gut reaction is to wonder if L is being molested. Children who are
> >will frequently "replay" what is happening to them by doing the same
> >things to other children. It isn't that they're kissing, so much, as
> >your description of L being on top of A, and the fact that she doesn't
> >do this in front of you, but only when they don't know you are watching
> >-- a sign that she knows there's something wrong.
> >
> >As I said, it is a gut response, based on nothing but what you've
> >posted. However, I think I'd want to mention what I saw to L's parents,
> >and also tell them that you'd heard it COULD be a sign of a child who
> >has been subjected to some inappropriate touching by some adult or
> >teenager in their lives.
> >
> >I'd just stay close when she's playing with your daughter, so they don't
> >have an opportunity to play like this. It's hard, but doable.
> >
> >meh
> >
> >
>
Sue Larson
> school. When I asked them where they got the idea to do that, they said
they
> saw it on TV, or in a magazine.
>
> I told them that those behaviors are for grown ups only, and not for kids
of
> their age. I didn't try to run a guilt trip or say that it was dirty or
> bad, but to keep it simple I said that it was something that grown-ups do
> when they are ready to start a family, and they are not grown up yet. When
I
> caught them doing it again, I put them on time-out, and explained again
that
> it's inappropriate behavior for their age. I didn't give them more
> information than they needed to know or go into explaining what sex was -
> kids are naturally curious and will try anything you tell them about. I
> explained that when they are adults they are free to engage in whatever of
> those activities they want, but while they are kids they are not allowed -
> period. I explained that if they continued, I'd have to tell their
parents
> and they would be permanently separated. That pretty much put an end to
it.
>
jump all over you with this one.
Susan
<m...@me.net> wrote in message news:oWccc.36$j26....@nntp1-sf.pbi.net...
m...@me.net
R. Steve Walz
>
> I can't expect every child to grow smoothly, but I consider it part of
> the necessary education parents must give to their children to teach
> them how to deal with the problem of "not feeling like a fish in the
> water". How can I make this be understood? I was a child that felt
> this way and my parents had the typical attitude "just wait and it
> will solve itself" and this DOES NOT WORK. Look for yourself in the
> newsgroups devoted to this kind of problems, there are large numbers
> of late teens and young adults who are literally desperate. What do
> you do to avoid that as a parent? Isn't that a reasonable question as
> a parent? Isn't that a problem serious enough to be discussed in a
> parenting newsgroup?
Introduce these kids to each other. Set up a situation where they
are encouraged by adult counselors to reveal their real feelings
by adult examples. Introduce them to a more and more sexually open
situation of physical contact to each other, and then sponsor nude
sex education and invite group sexual contact, and mutual comforting.
That's what they need and would have in any decent tribe.
> > Do you think so? What is "normal"? Is being different from the most
> > common bad?
>
> Being hindered in one's social interactions is bad, certainly. Note
> that the expression being "different" has a double meaning. You can be
> "different" if you don't want to agree or adhere to one or more of the
> prevalent social dogmas. Liking classical music instead of the
> prevalent pop/rock culture is being "different" for a kid, for
> example. That's ok, even positive in many cases. You can also be
> "different" if you are rejected by your peer. The class slut just as
> much as the class nerd are "different" in that sense.
------------------------
Acquaintance with these persons and personalities dispels this
uncontrolled group prejudice.
> What is normal? I post because I want to find out. I have no clear
> idea, because I was not a "normal" teen. Let me see:
> -starting sex at 11, group sex commune, and having sex in front of
> your kids: not "normal", in the sense that it is not a prevalent
> practice in todays western society. Maybe it would be a good idea, but
> that is another question.
-------------------
That makes kids who are confident and accomplished, who never feel
they need to ask who they are.
> -extreme religious bigotry, keeping yourself a virgin till marriage,
> etc: not "normal" (unless you live in a such community, in which case
> I would advise moving...). I also think it is a generally bad idea:
> please consider that when the idea of virgin brides was started, girls
> got married between 15 and 18 and boys little later than that. Any
> girl unwed at 24 was considered a major problem for the whole village
> to solve (it happened to one of my grandmothers and I was told they
> had special ceremonies in that case, etc...).
-------------------------
Uh-huh.
> I believe that "normal" in our society means: starting masturbating
> between 11 and 13,
-------------
Often 10 for boys and much earlier for girls.
> starting first relationships and dating between 12
> and 14 (kissing, fondling), starting sex (mutual masturbation, oral
> sex or intercourse) between 15 and 18,
----------------
Not that late, geez. Most sex *I* know of from MY kids started at
11-14.
> maybe have a series of 2-5
> relationships betwen that age and the age at which you end your study
> (which can be between 18 and 28 where I live), then start a familly
> and children.
-----------------
Lately kids just keep fucking their friends by the dozens till age 30.
> But I don't really know what happens to normal teens
> between 10 and 18 and I am interested in other peoples' opinion. To
> take one of the examples that was given here: is mutual sexual
> exploration at age 11 normal (in the sense that it is prevalent or in
> the sense that it is a necessary step in chidren development)?
----------------------
Of course it is.
> > > -the vicious circle may be broken at a later age (say 18-25, sometimes
> > > as late as 40) by the young adult giving himself to an abusive person (...)
> >
> > I hope you are wrong. I can't say you are, but this all seems a bit
> > far fetched to me.
>
> You said you hope I am wrong, I understand that you hope that my and
> your children will not choose this path. So do I. But I have seen this
> behaviour very often around me. Then, indeed, I do not live in a
> "normal" environment in the sense that most of the people I know are
> either bigots (and I tend to avoid those nowadays) or
> engineers/academics (and those seem to have done exactly that with
> their life). I am sorry, people may not believe me, but this is what I
> see around me. Is it a wonder that I am looking for a different source
> of information?
--------------------
?????
> > > Obviously, I don't want that for my children. I would rather see them
> > > have social interactions that are around what is generally accepted
> > > for their age. But it is not easy to steer along that line.
> >
> > Trust them a bit more! I have been in this ng a very short time, and
> > from the few posts I have read written by you, I have a general idea
> > that you *are* giving your kid(s) the necessary tools to face the
> > challenges life will have for them.
-------------------------
Condoms and foam/jelly. The Pill ASAP.
> I do trust my children, but I also want them to choose a path to a
> happy life. And trust is not enough. You don't trust your children to
> learn to read, just saying "you are a bright child, this is a book,
> figure it out", you TEACH them. Social interactions are just the same,
> yet my parents did NOT teach me anything, they were quite content that
> I was devoting my time to study instead of fooling around and
> "trusted" that the problem will solve itself with time. Well, this did
> not work.
----------------------------------
This is why family sexual exploration early is quite natural and
desirable.
> > > yet were completely
> > > blocked about it. It actually made the frustration worse.
> >
> > Let me pull a Rsteve here: I think that could be due to their parent's
> > attitude about it. Maybe they studied a lot about sex in school but at
> > home sex was a taboo and therefore they grew up blocking it because
> > they were taught to repress their sexual drive and curiosity. Or maybe
> > their parents *tried* to be natural about it, but still gave a double
> > message. Remember how this thread started? Pip, the original poster,
> > told her girl "there is nothing wrong with kissing but don't do it".
> > I'M NOT SAYING PIP WILL DAMAGE HER DAUGHTER IN ANY WAY. It is just an
> > example of a double message given by a good intentioned parent. When
> > it comes to sex, many parents will really try, but fail, to be
> > natural, because they themselves are quite blocked.
>
> What you say is both right and interesting, but unrelated to what I
> meant. I mean that, when you are a 17 year old teen that cannot find
> anybody who wants to date you, reading that the average age at which
> teens have their first intercourse is 15 makes you feel sorry for
> yourself. That is what I meant by "making the frustration worse".
--------------------------
Anybody who has been sexually explorative can ask for sex from someone.
It's only kids raised to believe that their sexual advances are
altogether unwanted and even detested by others who become so isolated
and desperate. Parents should definitely be trying to get their kids
laid if they show the least interest, or none, because none means they
are too frightened to even be normal about it. Emphasize to them that
they need not find Mr. Right tonight, and that that quest is really
obnoxious to be fixated on and it interferes with Real Life, and that
sex can just be a good time and a way to find friends and meet people.
Parents should be saying: Here, girl, take these condoms and go invite
that boy down the street into your room and then fuck his brains out,
and he's invioted to supper. He doesn't have to be your life-partner,
just use the shit out of his mouth and cock and make a friend! And
make sure you get him to eat your little bottom, if you suck him
and fuck him it's the least he can do, don't be shy, remember, he
doesn't have to be Mr. Right, and if he won't you will find someone
else quickly if you take our advice about this and ASK THEM! You'll
be SHOCKED how many boys will want to eat you and fuck you stupid!!
> Please note that the problem of "not finding anybody who wants to date
> you" plagues males just as well as females. Social interactions are
> very competitive, and in any competition there are loosers. I want to
> help my kids not to be in the looser camp.
-----------------------------------------
You mean "loser", those who are "looser" are NOT "losers".
Those who are loose get laid more.
> Now, if you excuse me when I vent some of my frustration (not from
> you, sorry) at posting here for this kind of help: what is it that is
> wrong with you, people? Can't you bloody see that this society has a
> problem? Don't you know that suicide is the number 1 cause of
> mortality for kids? Don't you know that depression is a major health
> issue in the developed world? Haven't anyone but me tried pointing
> their newsreaders to teens self help groups and see the hordes of
> desperate teens that post "I get no sex"?
> Isn't there anybody besides
> an old, sad hippie that lives by the memories of 30 years old wacko
> experiences to at least have something moderately entertaining to say
> on the subject?
--------------------------
I don't live in my memories, how ridiculous!
> Isn't it normal, as a parent, to try to teach our
> children to avoid failing their lifes?
---------------------------------
This society can be very depressing if you don't know a few people who
aren't like that.
Steve
R. Steve Walz
>
> I'd seen a couple of pretty young kids do this when I was helping out at a
> school. When I asked them where they got the idea to do that, they said they
> saw it on TV, or in a magazine.
>
> I told them that those behaviors are for grown ups only, and not for kids of
> their age. I didn't try to run a guilt trip or say that it was dirty or
> bad, but to keep it simple I said that it was something that grown-ups do
> when they are ready to start a family, and they are not grown up yet.
That was stupid and vicious and you should have the shit beaten out
of you for it, you creep!
> When I
> caught them doing it again, I put them on time-out, and explained again that
> it's inappropriate behavior for their age. I didn't give them more
> information than they needed to know or go into explaining what sex was -
> kids are naturally curious and will try anything you tell them about.
-----------------
Eat shit, you fuckin' asswipe. You're fucking done around here,
you've revealed yourself to be nothing more than criminally abusive!
> I
> explained that when they are adults they are free to engage in whatever of
> those activities they want, but while they are kids they are not allowed -
> period. I explained that if they continued, I'd have to tell their parents
> and they would be permanently separated. That pretty much put an end to it.
-------------------
Somebody should shoot you through the head and leave you for the
fucking garbage!
Steve
m...@me.net
"R. Steve Walz" <rst...@armory.com> wrote in message
news:407208...@armory.com...
Alina
> Maybe, but then the parents should know how to handle it (after all
> this a parenting newsgroup). So how would you approach this challenge?
Well, I say let them handle it. There is only so much you can do for
your kids, and many times the best you can do is let THEM find
first-handly their way. Meanwhile, you can offer them all the support
you can give them. But don't try to solve their lifes for them.
> In my experience, the idea that you should stay a virgin also helps
> them rationalising the lack of sexual experience.
Could be. Poor girls (*sigh* )
> Yes. But what I wanted to say is that "forcing" and "natural" don't go
> very well together. If you force yourself, and unless you are a
> brilliant actor, the kids will know.
Of course. That's when you need to get rid of your own taboos and
blockages.
> Maybe it is better to tell them
> that you thought differently when you were younger but that times have
> changed and that you know now that you were wrong? At least it is less
> of a lie.
Maybe. Other approach could be let's study this together so that you
learn and I re-learn, only right this time.
> (from another post ...) but I consider it part of
> the necessary education parents must give to their children to teach
> them how to deal with the problem of "not feeling like a fish in the
> water". How can I make this be understood?
It is understood. I don't think you can teach them that, however. What
you CAN do is raise them with a strong self-esteem, to trust
themselves, to be resourcesful and creative. And, also, give them all
the support they need, have them trust you, become someone they can
come to to talk in order to vent and not only for fatherly advice.
THAT is what I meant by "giving them the tools to face such a
challenge".
> I was a child that felt this way and my parents had the typical attitude "just
> wait and it will solve itself" and this DOES NOT WORK.
I am very sorry to read that. Sincerely.
> Look for yourself in the
> newsgroups devoted to this kind of problems, there are large numbers
> of late teens and young adults who are literally desperate.
I believe you, there IS such a problem very much present today. It's
origin may be variable, don't you think?
> What do
> you do to avoid that as a parent? Isn't that a reasonable question as
> a parent? Isn't that a problem serious enough to be discussed in a
> parenting newsgroup?
1) I don't really know, but just posted some ideas. 2) Yes, it's a
very reasonable question, 3) Yes, it is. Let us continue this
discussion.
Best regards,
Alina.
Sue Larson
> that boy down the street into your room and then fuck his brains out,
> and he's invioted to supper. He doesn't have to be your life-partner,
> just use the shit out of his mouth and cock and make a friend! And
> make sure you get him to eat your little bottom, if you suck him
> and fuck him it's the least he can do, don't be shy, remember, he
> doesn't have to be Mr. Right, and if he won't you will find someone
> else quickly if you take our advice about this and ASK THEM! You'll
> be SHOCKED how many boys will want to eat you and fuck you stupid!!
>
explicit?
Susan
"R. Steve Walz" <rst...@armory.com> wrote in message
news:407207...@armory.com...
R. Steve Walz
You'll get yours, shit-mouth.
Steve
R. Steve Walz
>
> > Parents should be saying: Here, girl, take these condoms and go invite
> > that boy down the street into your room and then fuck his brains out,
> > and he's invioted to supper. He doesn't have to be your life-partner,
> > just use the shit out of his mouth and cock and make a friend! And
> > make sure you get him to eat your little bottom, if you suck him
> > and fuck him it's the least he can do, don't be shy, remember, he
> > doesn't have to be Mr. Right, and if he won't you will find someone
> > else quickly if you take our advice about this and ASK THEM! You'll
> > be SHOCKED how many boys will want to eat you and fuck you stupid!!
> >
> Gee, Steve, I don't quite understand this. Could you please be a little more
> explicit?
> Susan
I know that lots of you antisexual Xtian sickos didn't have
conversations like that with your kids, but WE did, and I know
dozens or hundreds of others who did, so get over it.
Steve
Jacques Michel
> jak...@yahoo.com (Jacques Michel) wrote in message news:<5e2ca8a5.04040...@posting.google.com>...
>
> > Maybe it is better to tell them
> > that you thought differently when you were younger but that times have
> > changed and that you know now that you were wrong? At least it is less
> > of a lie.
>
> Maybe. Other approach could be let's study this together so that you
> learn and I re-learn, only right this time.
>
A different approach of the same problem but also a good idea.
> > (from another post ...) but I consider it part of
> > the necessary education parents must give to their children to teach
> > them how to deal with the problem of "not feeling like a fish in the
> > water". How can I make this be understood?
>
> It is understood. I don't think you can teach them that, however. What
> you CAN do is raise them with a strong self-esteem, to trust
> themselves, to be resourcesful and creative. And, also, give them all
> the support they need, have them trust you, become someone they can
> come to to talk in order to vent and not only for fatherly advice.
> THAT is what I meant by "giving them the tools to face such a
> challenge".
>
Yes and no. I can give support, help and advice, but this is not
enough to correct low self-esteem. My feeling is that a child only
needs a few negative experiences to destroy his/her self esteem and
when it happens, something more proactive is needed. My feeling is
that a parent need to offer teaching on the ways to deal with people
and one's fear to ask. When talking to people is not natural, it has
to be learned. I am actually trying to learn it myself and found it
enlightening.
> > I was a child that felt this way and my parents had the typical attitude "just
> > wait and it will solve itself" and this DOES NOT WORK.
>
> I am very sorry to read that. Sincerely.
>
Thank you, but what I wanted to point out is that it is also quite a
prevalent attitude. Many parents don't realise their child has a
problem when they have a child that is just "too good".
> > Look for yourself in the
> > newsgroups devoted to this kind of problems, there are large numbers
> > of late teens and young adults who are literally desperate.
>
> I believe you, there IS such a problem very much present today. It's
> origin may be variable, don't you think?
>
Can you list different possibilities? Let's try that.
> > What do
> > you do to avoid that as a parent? Isn't that a reasonable question as
> > a parent? Isn't that a problem serious enough to be discussed in a
> > parenting newsgroup?
>
> 1) I don't really know, but just posted some ideas. 2) Yes, it's a
> very reasonable question, 3) Yes, it is. Let us continue this
> discussion.
>
At least it is something about parenting and not a pissing contest,
yes. ;-)
m...@me.net
What if that birth control fails or breaks and the kid contracts something
like VD or gets pregnant? I know more than one person that this has
happened to. Do you think a 12 year old is capable of making an
experienced, informed decision to either be a parent or get an abortion? A
friend of mine contracted mono just from kissing a guy she went out on a
date with ONCE when she was 14. And now she's doomed to month long sleeping
spells. If you were a parent encouraging your child to have sex willy
nilly, or at best voicing no objection, and something like this happened,
would you be able to live with yourself if your mistake put your child at
such risk?
What if your child gets manipulated into doing something they later felt
degraded and ashamed about, has to live with that the rest of their life and
feels you failed to protect him/her? How trustworthy will you be in your
child's eyes then?
Children are in the position of being under the authority of and dependent
upon adults to lead them in the right direction, support and protect them.
Children that have been manipulated or misled into sexual relations at a
young age, usually under the guise of it being natural and normal for them
to have sex, and that just because they feel it they should do it, are
being betrayed by that adult. Just because we have an impulse, doesn't
always make it right.
It is certainly not easy to discourage or prevent a teenager with raging
hormones from doing it in a society where their friends practically make it
a crime not to. But no one said parenting was easy. Let them know that
they always have an ear in you and ensure they are properly educated about
all the risks and rewards involved. There is no guarantee of success in our
current climate. But IMO, only a psychotic criminal with their own
gratification in mind or a witless, irresponsibile whimp of a parent would
actually sit by complacently and just throw out a box of condoms or worse,
encourage their children to have sex before they are of age. You might as
well buy them a burial plot while your at it, and mark the gravestone
"__(child's name's)___ future happiness and dreams potentially buried here"
and hand them a shovel.
If R.steve is any example, take his advice, and your kids will probably end
up as bitter, violent and irresponsible as him, and they'll burn out their
adrenal glands early on to boot. I have to ask myself, do I really want his
kind of turmoil and unhappiness for my kids? Heheheck no!
Jacques Michel
(snip)
> What if that birth control fails or breaks and the kid contracts something
> like VD or gets pregnant?
(snip)
It is alway possible, but the risk is probably lower than crossing the
street and be run over by a bus. Let's be reasonable.
(snip)
> Children that have been manipulated or misled into sexual relations at a
> young age, usually under the guise of it being natural and normal for them
> to have sex, and that just because they feel it they should do it, are
> being betrayed by that adult. Just because we have an impulse, doesn't
> always make it right.
>
But why would it be wrong? If you suppose BEFORE the discussion that
sexual activity between likely-minded children at an early age is
wrong, of course you will end up with this type of argument. In my
opinion, however, the truth is that we don't know. Maybe they'll be
damaged into thinking they have been abused, maybe they'll grow with a
higher confidence and better understanding of their body. How do you
know?
It is not because the opinion that early sex is bad is prevalent in
your community, that this opinion is true. It used to be a quite
prevalent opinion that the earth was flat (and it LOOKS flat!), yet it
is round.
The reasonable thing to do would be to turn to biological,
ethnographic and historical studies to seek more knowledge.
Unfortunately, the view from those studies is ambiguous and in any
case more complex than what Steve Walz wants us to believe. Or what
some religious authorities claim, BTW.
> If R.steve is any example, take his advice, and your kids will probably end
> up as bitter, violent and irresponsible as him, and they'll burn out their
> adrenal glands early on to boot. I have to ask myself, do I really want his
> kind of turmoil and unhappiness for my kids? Heheheck no!
>
That's a good argument. ;-)
Sue Larson
daughter (nor even teen daughter), HOWEVER, if she is dating someone and she
wants to pursue this, then it would be my responsibility to ensure that she
knew everything she needed to know about birth control, STD's, etc. To
forbid her otherwise, could vey well cause alot of grief and trouble for
her. You will find that not too many people here will agree 100% with
Steve's advice. He just told me to encourage having sex with every guy who
my nine year old daughter thinks is cute (NOW!)
Interesting that the other day we saw a movie and she didn't like it because
there was too much kissing in it ("gross"). I told her that one day she may
meet a boy she likes and will find nothing wrong with it then. (And, she
does see my husband and I kiss and always smiles, so it's not like she
hasn't seen it before or been made to believe it's shameful.) Her response
was "well...." as though she were saying, that when it happens she'll deal
with it then, but for now, forget it. A guy can be cute and that's all it
means, especially for a nine year old. It doesn't necessarily mean they want
to jump on the guy.
I don't think sex should be promoted, as I said earlier, but at the same
time, I think it's good for parents to not turn the other cheek, and to know
what is going on in their kids' lives. Perhaps if this is so, and they are
being treated halfway decently, alot of these girls wouldn't feel the need
to get out of the house and find that attention (in the form of sex) they so
desperately crave.
Susan
<m...@me.net> wrote in message news:ZtTcc.46$j26....@nntp1-sf.pbi.net...
>