Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: How Disney Ruined Sex For Everyone

  1. #1
    Sound methods Chlodovech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Last Online
    1 Minute Ago @ 12:35 AM
    Ethnicity
    Flemish
    Ancestry
    Frankish
    Country
    Holy Roman Empire Holy Roman Empire
    Gender
    Politics
    Völkisch traditionalist
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    3,123
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,432
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,473
    Thanked in
    1,073 Posts

    How Disney Ruined Sex For Everyone



    Source: MarkManson

    So, stop me if you’ve heard this one before. There’s this guy. He’s like a prince, or an orphan, or kind of a loser — like an orphan-prince-loser-type guy. And then there’s this girl. And she’s hot. And then usually there’s a bad guy too. And he’s bad.

    So, logically, our orphan-prince-loser-type guy has to save the hot girl, and usually does it by beating up the bad guy. He solves the super secret conspiracy to overthrow the government, or destroys the evil space ship, or has a sword fight to the death where his ear gets hacked off and he barely lives. Shit blows up. People die. The bad guy ultimately loses.

    The crowd goes wild. And our former orphan-prince-loser guy is now a capital-H Hero. And what do heroes get as their reward for saving the universe? Duh. The hot girl.

    What I just described to you is loosely the plot of practically every story you’ve ever been told — from Star Wars to Iron Man to Good Will Hunting to Super Mario Bros.

    And, of course, every Disney movie ever made.

    Sometimes there will be a wrinkle in the story too, making it “tragic.” Like the hero will even die for the hot girl (Terminator, Titanic) or the hot girl dies and the hero decides to go on a murderous rampage for love and righteousness (Braveheart, Gladiator), or the girl turns out to be batshit insane and the hero realizes he threw away his entire life for nothing (Gone with the Wind, Vertigo). And in rare instances, the hero cannot be with the hot girl for legitimate capital-H Heroic reasons and must live a life of solemn “what if?” misery (Casablanca, Shawshank Redemption, etc.).

    Yes, this is practically every movie you’ve ever watched, every comic book you’ve ever read, every video game you’ve ever beaten, every story book that your parents read to your drooling face.

    And it’s fucking up your love life.



    Yes, Disney is wholly responsible for your lack of sexual confidence, your failed relationships, and that gnawing feeling you get when you think about how you might die alone.1 And here’s why:

    These stories send messages to us as we’re growing up. Some of the messages are nice, like “Trees are good!” and “Greed is bad!” Other messages are bad. They’re messages that are hammered into our drooling faces our whole lives and they give us really screwed up expectations. One of those bad messages is: a man must earn the right to be with a “good” woman, and a woman isn’t “good enough” if a man isn’t trying to prove his worth to her with grand gestures of his affection.

    If a man wants to be with a beautiful girl, he has to do something capital-H Heroic, he has to stand out, be someone unique and amazing and awe-inspiring. Otherwise women will never like him. He has to save the fucking world. Only then will a woman fawn over his heroic and noble acts and finally let him see her naked. That’s all he’s worth: a stamp of approval from a woman. So he better start blowing shit up.

    Women end up believing that if a man isn’t trying to impress her, isn’t trying to show her how capital-H Heroic he is and how far he’ll go to win her approval (and to see her naked), then there is something deeply and horribly flawed about her.

    What a fucked up way to go about finding someone to get naked with.

    But it’s the storybook narrative. And in the 21st century, it really screws up our dating lives.

    1) Men spend their entire lives believing they’re not good enough to be with a woman. Men are taught to feel an immense pressure to impress women, to perform for them, to show off their money or their cars or how many digits of Pi they can memorize, so chicks might like them. This is needy and unattractive behavior and reinforces low self-esteem as well as sexual anxiety. There’s a reason most guys need to be hammered to even tell a girl they like her. They all feel like they’re not good enough to like her.

    2) Women spend their entire lives waiting for a man to do something amazing to impress her. Or, in other words, she spends her entire life waiting for her prince charming, her knight in shining armor to come “sweep her off her feet.” Women are conditioned to believe that they’re a prize that men are supposed to win through some great achievement. And when no man is saving the world or cutting off people’s heads with a badass broad sword in the name of her love, then she inevitably ends up disappointed. It sends the message that she’s not good enough. No man is killing himself for her vagina. Therefore, her vagina must be faulty in some way.

    The storybook narrative instills sexual insecurity and promotes lofty standards, which, when unmet, causes both men and women to become ornery and unaccommodating to the realities of attraction and the courtship process.

    When men feel like they can never be good enough to win the vagina, they decide to come up with ways to trick women into liking them. Sometimes they do it through manipulation. Sometimes they do it through overcompensation. In extreme cases, they may do it by force.

    When women feel like they can never be good enough to have their vagina won from them, they try to trick men into earning it. They play hard-to-get, create a bunch of unnecessary drama, or always keep the man guessing as to what their intentions really are.

    Sex as Transaction, Sex as Performance

    But I’ll be real for a second: Disney isn’t actually responsible for this stuff. The storybook narrative has been going on for most of western civilization. It’s littered throughout Shakespearean and medieval texts. Even the Trojan War in The Iliad was started because of a beef over a hottie named Helen.



    The reason this narrative has existed so long is because marriage was the economic and political building block for most of the existence of civilization. In feudal societies, the way men guaranteed security to their estates was through marrying women of wealthy (and often competing) families. If you were a man of one of the underclasses, the only way to “marry up” into wealth or greater power was through accomplishing some amazing feat, usually in war. Hence, the epic tale of valiant knights saving the princess that is so often repeated.

    But we live in the 21st century. Our politics and economics are no longer arranged through marriages. No one marries for political power. Women have jobs and earn their own money. We live in free-market democracies. 99.9% of us will never see a battlefield in our lives.

    Years ago, sex writer Clarisse Thorn introduced me to the idea of sex as performance versus sex as transaction. The idea was originally put forth by Thomas MacAulay Millar2 in Yes Means Yes (a book that, I won’t lie, made me cringe a little the first time I read it). The idea is also backed up and expanded upon in books such as Sex at Dawn and Marriage: A History.

    The idea goes something like this:

    Anthropological evidence suggests that in prehistory, hunter/gatherer societies were, umm, rather “loose” with their sexual morals.3 The idea of marriage or sexual possession was (and still is) largely anathema to most of these groups. But with the rise of agriculture, humans, for the first time in our species’ existence, had surpluses of resources. And not only did we have surpluses of resources, but men, due to their size and strength, gained a large competitive advantage at acquiring them over women. Men began to compete against one another economically, hoarding surplus resources and then using those resources to dominate the others around them. Economic hierarchies were born. Cities/states followed. Monarchs and lords and the feudal system followed from that, as did organized warfare and the first empires.

    (Famous scientist and author Jared Diamond went as far as to call agriculture “The biggest mistake in human history,” — I’m not sure I would go that far.)4

    The problem with this new social structure was that men, for the first time ever, had two major concerns: 1) they needed to guarantee paternity of their own children and 2) they needed to manage their political competition through marriages, alliances and familial bonds.

    Thus female chastity began to matter. Fidelity began to matter. Fertility began to matter. Sex became an economic and political transaction, and women — who were now useless for war and physical labor — became pro-creating assets for men. Women provided sex and procreation. In return, their families were given resources, dowries, political alliances, land, etc.

    Men now had to earn the approval of a woman and her family. And women were now expected to be chaste and aloof yet submissive until a man finally did win her over.

    And so they did, for about 7,000 years, plus or minus.

    But as I mentioned earlier, times have changed. We don’t arrange our society through marriages anymore. We can will our resources to anyone of our choosing when we die. We have legal systems in place to guarantee our assets. Women have jobs and their own incomes. STD’s are no longer lethal. Women and men have birth control and can dictate their own procreation. We live in the most non-violent period of human history.5 People are living well past 80.

    Treating sex as a transaction no longer makes sense. In fact, now that the economic deck has been shuffled and largely equalized, treating sex as a transaction harms the self-esteem and emotional health of both men and women.

    In terms of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, we no longer need to use sex to fulfill our physiological and security needs. Now we can move on to using it to meet our needs for intimacy and esteem.

    What Millar proposes — somewhat radically — is that we should treat sex as a performance, as an activity that is done for the sake of doing it, for the sake of self-expression and pleasure and intimacy.

    When sex is treated as a transaction, it’s often in both men and women’s interests to hide or misdirect their intentions, creating the perception of higher value so they can earn as much as possible from the interaction. As I’ve detailed before, this leads to all sorts of unpleasant processes that make dating a pain in the ass and interferes with intimacy and self esteem.

    When sex is treated as performance, then it’s in the best interest of both men and women to approach it with clear intentions, without shame, and without judgment — strategies which are proven to attract more members of the opposite sex, to create more satisfying sexual relationships, and to remove any ambiguity as to each person’s intentions.



    Is it possible to ever 100% reach a model of sex as performance? Probably not. Despite contraception and medicine, women will always bear more risk for sexual behavior than men. Men and women will always have biologically different sex drives. But it’s an ideal. And as an ideal it should be strived toward even if it’s never met. For the sake of us all.

    And maybe the next generation won’t have to be brainwashed by the same Disney movies we were.

    Porn movies and Disney are responsible for the most frustrated human beings I know
    “Remember that all worlds draw to an end and that noble death is a treasure which no-one is too poor to buy.” - C. S. Lewis, The Last Battle

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Chlodovech For This Useful Post:


  3. #2
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member


    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Gender
    Posts
    832
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    68
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    100
    Thanked in
    39 Posts
    But we live in the 21st century. Our politics and economics are no longer arranged through marriages. No one marries for political power. Women have jobs and earn their own money. We live in free-market democracies. 99.9% of us will never see a battlefield in our lives.
    Treating sex as a transaction no longer makes sense. In fact, now that the economic deck has been shuffled and largely equalized, treating sex as a transaction harms the self-esteem and emotional health of both men and women.

    In terms of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, we no longer need to use sex to fulfill our physiological and security needs. Now we can move on to using it to meet our needs for intimacy and esteem.

    What Millar proposes — somewhat radically — is that we should treat sex as a performance, as an activity that is done for the sake of doing it, for the sake of self-expression and pleasure and intimacy.
    The goal set by the author of this article is a very modernist and progressivist idea. It stands or falls by the 'accomplishments' of modern day society. Without individualism, emancipatory equality and hedonism, the argument ceases to make sense.

    The Disney story that is supposed to have ruined sex is actually based on traditional relations between the sexes (perhaps in its modern variant). The author even admits this, so the focus on Disney as the source of all problems is a bit strange. Consider the following:

    1) Men spend their entire lives believing they’re not good enough to be with a woman. Men are taught to feel an immense pressure to impress women, to perform for them, to show off their money or their cars or how many digits of Pi they can memorize, so chicks might like them. This is needy and unattractive behavior and reinforces low self-esteem as well as sexual anxiety. There’s a reason most guys need to be hammered to even tell a girl they like her. They all feel like they’re not good enough to like her.

    2) Women spend their entire lives waiting for a man to do something amazing to impress her. Or, in other words, she spends her entire life waiting for her prince charming, her knight in shining armor to come “sweep her off her feet.” Women are conditioned to believe that they’re a prize that men are supposed to win through some great achievement. And when no man is saving the world or cutting off people’s heads with a badass broad sword in the name of her love, then she inevitably ends up disappointed. It sends the message that she’s not good enough. No man is killing himself for her vagina. Therefore, her vagina must be faulty in some way.
    This is quite in tune even with evolutionary psychology. It really makes sense biologically speaking. The fact that this causes perhaps such an amount of pressure on modern people looking for a spouse, I would argue, is rather due to the discrepancy between modern emancipatory life and this, evolutionary ingrained, ideal relation between the sexes. Because our current sociological and ideological circumstances tell us a story of equality between the sexes, individualism and hedonism, our natural inclination to more traditional relationships or our natural drive that lies at the foundation of courtship conflicts with what the modern environment demands of us. This is where the confusion is located, not in the 'Disney story' itself.

    Another point is that the Disney story doesn't present reality to us, but an idealist interpretation of it. Marriage as transaction has not always been distributed among different classes equally. Whereas in the middle ages the nobility hardly had any freedom in choosing their marriage partner, this was different for the lower classes. Similarly the medieval songs that tell about knightly romance didn't reflect the lived experience of love of the majority of the people. It's a very typical error of the modern age to confuse ideals with reality and to fail to understand that not living up to the ideal is not the end of the world. To demand the ideal to change because of the failure of people to live up to it (like this author seems to advocate) is the same line of thought that has given rise to obese models.

  4. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Bernhard For This Useful Post:


  5. #3
    One with Nature
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Víđálfr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Daco-Germanic
    Ancestry
    Daci, Suebi, Carpi
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Politics
    Völkisch
    Religion
    Heidin
    Posts
    1,003
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    902
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    982
    Thanked in
    454 Posts
    I also think the author exaggerates things... Interesting article, it has some points, but other than that, there are a lot of other things that should be taken into account.

    First of all, let's not forget our ethos, our myths, our folklore. Our folkloric stories are ageless, and they reflect the essence of our nations, of the souls of our folks.

    Yes, there are such patterns in there, but this is also about the traditional roles of men and women. (I won't take Disney into equation, that's a "modern interpretation of old stories", and many modern stories, such as those mentioned by the author, are still built on some old roots.) I don't agree that we should just throw tradition away, as the author, and many others like him, try to promote. Mostly, frustrated men and women would promote such ideas of throwing away the old traditional ways either because they are not able to meet with the ideals or just because they are not able to find a partner that meets their own ideals. What the tradition is or what it should be, that's another issue...

    I think the article shows a simplistic and limited way of thinking, and I cannot agree with it.

    Ever heard of the collective unconscious? This is the source of such stories, fairy tales and so on...

    Let's just take dictionary definitions:

    collective unconscious

    n.In Jungian psychology, a part of the unconscious mind, shared by a society, a people, or all humankind, that is the product of ancestral experience.

    American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition. Copyright © 2016 by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. All rights reserved.
    "The product of ancestral experience", right?


    collec′tive uncon′scious

    n.(in Jungian psychology) inborn unconscious psychic material common to humankind, accumulated by the experience of all preceding generations.

    Compare archetype (def. 2).
    Random House Kernerman Webster's College Dictionary, © 2010 K Dictionaries Ltd. Copyright 2005, 1997, 1991 by Random House, Inc. All rights reserved.
    "The experience of all preceding generations"


    See? It's about our cultural heritage! And different nations have different dating cultures too... Of course, there are some common features too, as for example the traditional (and natural) roles of men and women...

    Agreeing with such ideas as expressed in the above article is similar to agreeing with "feminist ideas" or with other "modern" ideas that poison our souls...

    I am not saying we should not think for ourselves and that we should respect tradition as it is. Again, what tradition is, depends for each culture, for each nation, for each family, and so on... I am not that strict.


    Quote Originally Posted by Chlodovech View Post
    One of those bad messages is: a man must earn the right to be with a “good” woman, and a woman isn’t “good enough” if a man isn’t trying to prove his worth to her with grand gestures of his affection.
    That's not a bad message, or not completely bad. I think it's normal for both men and women to earn the respect and appreciation of the opposite gender. Traditionally, let's take just one example, the men would impress and earn the respect of women through their heroism, while women would be appreciated for their beauty and other feminine qualities.

    What's so difficult to understand here? It's also natural selection (more or less, in these "modern" days, since the ideals have changed)...


    Quote Originally Posted by Chlodovech View Post
    What a fucked up way to go about finding someone to get naked with.
    The author should just go to nudist beaches if he wants to be around naked women... (Just kidding!)


    One big problem of the above article, besides the language used (too much slang in there!), is that it misses one very important ingredient in relationships: LOVE!

    When you truly love someone all these standards are no longer valid, and there are no more rules. You're trying to impress and earn the respect of the one you love, or win their heart, no matter what your gender is. Or, well, some women still play "hard to get", even if they are in love with that guy, just because they think it's the right way to do it (tradition plays its role here).

    Another problem that the article is missing is that, if as a woman you try to impress the man you love and don't play "hard to get", then there are high chances to be considered "easy" and "not worthy"...

    Well, what about this? What should women do then? If they wait to be "conquered" it's not good, if they have initiative to be with the man they love or like, again that's not good, they are perceived as being "easy to get", and the man they wish to be with loses their interest in them. The hunter instinct here, maybe? If the prey comes to you, you are no longer interested, right? And you want another one, that's "hard to get"...

    Again, let's go into psychology here to understand these matters...


    Quote Originally Posted by Chlodovech View Post
    When men feel like they can never be good enough to win the vagina
    Why win their vaginas and not their hearts?

    The way this article is written is simply... horrible.


    Quote Originally Posted by Chlodovech View Post
    Years ago, sex writer Clarisse Thorn introduced me to the idea of sex as performance versus sex as transaction. The idea was originally put forth by Thomas MacAulay Millar2 in Yes Means Yes (a book that, I won’t lie, made me cringe a little the first time I read it). The idea is also backed up and expanded upon in books such as Sex at Dawn and Marriage: A History.
    These ideas are not new at all. Just go to oriental writings about the art of love making, for example Kama Sutra, and many more...


    Quote Originally Posted by Chlodovech View Post
    In terms of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, we no longer need to use sex to fulfill our physiological and security needs. Now we can move on to using it to meet our needs for intimacy and esteem.
    Nothing new! In older times people already knew that...


    Quote Originally Posted by Chlodovech View Post
    Porn movies and Disney are responsible for the most frustrated human beings I know
    What an immature conclusion! To throw the blame on external factors is very immature, when we should take responsibility for ourselves.


    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    The goal set by the author of this article is a very modernist and progressivist idea. It stands or falls by the 'accomplishments' of modern day society.
    Exactly! Very good observation!


    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    The Disney story that is supposed to have ruined sex is actually based on traditional relations between the sexes (perhaps in its modern variant). The author even admits this, so the focus on Disney as the source of all problems is a bit strange.
    I agree!


    Quote Originally Posted by Bernhard View Post
    Marriage as transaction has not always been distributed among different classes equally. Whereas in the middle ages the nobility hardly had any freedom in choosing their marriage partner, this was different for the lower classes. Similarly the medieval songs that tell about knightly romance didn't reflect the lived experience of love of the majority of the people. It's a very typical error of the modern age to confuse ideals with reality and to fail to understand that not living up to the ideal is not the end of the world. To demand the ideal to change because of the failure of people to live up to it (like this author seems to advocate) is the same line of thought that has given rise to obese models.
    Very good points!
    Die Farben duften frisch und grün... Lieblich haucht der Wind um mich.

  6. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Víđálfr For This Useful Post:


  7. #4
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Finnish Swede's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Finnish Swede
    Ancestry
    Father: Swedish, Mother Finnish Swede
    Subrace
    Sub-Nordid - Nordid - Baltid mix
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Finland Swede Community Finland Swede Community
    Location
    Ostrobothnia
    Gender
    Age
    21
    Zodiac Sign
    Pisces
    Occupation
    Student
    Politics
    No specific ideology
    Religion
    Lutheran
    Posts
    1,647
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    362
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,383
    Thanked in
    1,316 Posts
    I think this goes like it should go...





  8. #5
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Gefjon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Gender
    Age
    38
    Posts
    1,363
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    75
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    187
    Thanked in
    87 Posts
    Said it before and I said it again, this is all natural. It's biology. Women are conditioned to look for a dude who impresses them through "heroic" acts and somesuch, cause heroic acts mean that the dude is strong enough to give her quality offspring, and protect his family from outside forces. Same goes with showing off the money. Being industrious means he can provide for the family. Back in the days of the cave, chicks also went for the dudes who were the best hunter-gatherers.

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to Gefjon For This Useful Post:


  10. #6
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Norman Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Canadian
    Ancestry
    Anglo-Norman & German
    Country
    Canada Canada
    Gender
    Politics
    Libertarian
    Religion
    Heathen
    Posts
    222
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    53
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    145
    Thanked in
    59 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Víđálfr View Post
    Or, well, some women still play "hard to get", even if they are in love with that guy, just because they think it's the right way to do it (tradition plays its role here).

    Another problem that the article is missing is that, if as a woman you try to impress the man you love and don't play "hard to get", then there are high chances to be considered "easy" and "not worthy"...

    Well, what about this? What should women do then? If they wait to be "conquered" it's not good, if they have initiative to be with the man they love or like, again that's not good, they are perceived as being "easy to get", and the man they wish to be with loses their interest in them. The hunter instinct here, maybe? If the prey comes to you, you are no longer interested, right? And you want another one, that's "hard to get"...
    I agree with this. Women will be damned if they do, and damned if they don't. Just because they play hard to get doesn't necessarily mean they are, but they try to stick with what is considered to be tradition. We all know the story of the girl who gets dumped and never hears from the guy she received in her bed the night before. So to all those who complain about those standards, be them feminist or traditionalist, what would in your mind be the ideal way to form a relationship? We hear complaints all the time, but when it comes to solutions and strategies, there is very little constructiveness...

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Norman Pride For This Useful Post:


  12. #7
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Finnish Swede's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Finnish Swede
    Ancestry
    Father: Swedish, Mother Finnish Swede
    Subrace
    Sub-Nordid - Nordid - Baltid mix
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Finland Swede Community Finland Swede Community
    Location
    Ostrobothnia
    Gender
    Age
    21
    Zodiac Sign
    Pisces
    Occupation
    Student
    Politics
    No specific ideology
    Religion
    Lutheran
    Posts
    1,647
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    362
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,383
    Thanked in
    1,316 Posts
    I live how I want to live. How I want to see myself (as looking on the mirror). Avoiding mistakes and so called moral hangovers.

    I'm surely not a easy one to get. But that's because of me (how I see myself and how I value myself) ... and not so much bases on what guys might think about it. More like ... I leave that to them ... and bases on my faith to fact that ... mr right one will value that too. If he doesn't; well ... by then he hardly was the right one at all. Not a huge lost, right?

  13. #8
    One with Nature
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Víđálfr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Daco-Germanic
    Ancestry
    Daci, Suebi, Carpi
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Politics
    Völkisch
    Religion
    Heidin
    Posts
    1,003
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    902
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    982
    Thanked in
    454 Posts
    Finnish Swede, if you're in doubt who to choose, my advice is to follow your heart. You'll never regret, or you'll regret less, if you choose the one you love.

    Relationships require a lot of time and dedication, it makes no sense to invest and lose your time in a relationship with someone you don't love. It won't work, it won't last, or at least you won't be happy in it. At least for us women, this is very important! We can teach men how to love, if we love them and they don't know yet how to love us and if they are open to it, but if we don't love...

    I don't know about other women, but personally I couldn't "spread my legs" for someone I don't love with all my heart!


    Quote Originally Posted by Norman Pride View Post
    So to all those who complain about those standards, be them feminist or traditionalist, what would in your mind be the ideal way to form a relationship?
    Well, I opened this thread a while ago: How to Build a Perfect Union of Love Based on the Highest Ideals

    In my opinion, and I am going to emphasize this as many times as needed, the most important ingredient is LOVE. When there is enough love, then you find time and patience and everything needed to make your relationship work. Like someone said in that thread I just mentioned, marriage is like a garden, all the flowers need to be taken care of. The same goes with all relationships, not necessarily only with marriages.

    How to start a relationship? That's another issue and I'm not sure I know the answer.

    The previous relationship I had it started as friends... and it developed into more. This is my ideal way of starting a relationship, you get time to know each other and see if it's worth it to try more or not... Even if there is passion and great sexual attraction, you need other things too to be compatible and make a relationship work.

    But depends on what each person wants. I assume we here are serious people who want serious relationships, not just to "have fun" and forget the day after what happened.

    The problem I personally encountered is that I was mistaken as being "easy" (for example, being told "You fall in love too easily!"), just because I knew what I wanted and I assumed the risk of being honest about my feelings. I don't like to play "the game of seduction", which many men and especially women like to play. I don't like to play games like that where many people get involved just for self-gratification and to show off how good they are and how many people they can make fall in love with them and dump them afterwards. It's painful for the persons being dumped and used just to increase the self-esteem of those who are seducing them. Well, some people like this game and play it, and I guess they are compatible with each other. But this is not for me. I have other ways to know if a person is right for me or not... And, most important, I go for the one I love... The man who is the King of my Heart can have me, of course, when I feel is right, and I know where to set the limits for all the other men who might want to be more than friends with me. Maybe I should play "hard to get" too, just to not be mistaken as being "easy"? I don't know... I just prefer to be honest. And I hope the one I love will realize he had the wrong impression...
    Die Farben duften frisch und grün... Lieblich haucht der Wind um mich.

  14. #9
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Finnish Swede's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Finnish Swede
    Ancestry
    Father: Swedish, Mother Finnish Swede
    Subrace
    Sub-Nordid - Nordid - Baltid mix
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Finland Swede Community Finland Swede Community
    Location
    Ostrobothnia
    Gender
    Age
    21
    Zodiac Sign
    Pisces
    Occupation
    Student
    Politics
    No specific ideology
    Religion
    Lutheran
    Posts
    1,647
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    362
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,383
    Thanked in
    1,316 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Víđálfr View Post
    Finnish Swede, if you're in doubt who to choose, my advice is to follow your heart. You'll never regret, or you'll regret less, if you choose the one you love.
    Of course/fully agree with this. Could't be any other ways. Still sometimes even love might not be enough. There can also be lots of practical issues or real life matters, which should be get solved someway. Especially if people are living very far from each others, even different countries or even different continents. I think these are pretty sad matters ... to both of them; calling that a love which might did't get a change?

    Quote Originally Posted by Víđálfr View Post
    Relationships require a lot of time and dedication, it makes no sense to invest and lose your time in a relationship with someone you don't love. It won't work, it won't last, or at least you won't be happy in it.
    Again I fully agree. Some people (men?) in these nationalist/conservative forums tends to say that women's wish or pure demand of happiness is so called overvalued matter ... even going so far ... that those kind of ''poisonous ideas'' (one form of ''individualism''?) has come from enemy (Jews) ... and we should simply ''accept'' things as they were earlier ... women get marry and stayed marry ... not because of love & happiness ... but via pure economical reasons. ''Happiness'' was not a game changer. Sorry, as I will not use my one time life like that. Others? They are free to do what ever they want/thinks the best/right.

  15. #10
    Senior Member Idis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Last Online
    5 Days Ago @ 07:00 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    Dutch, Low German & French
    Country
    United States United States
    Gender
    Age
    30
    Family
    Married parent
    Politics
    Free & Libertarian
    Religion
    Cultural Christian
    Posts
    124
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    75
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    106
    Thanked in
    43 Posts
    I was actually under the impression that Disney stories were based on traditional fairy tales. The concepts such as Prince Charming somewhat remind of romanticism and chivalry. Of course it is an ideal, but so are many other things in life.

    P.S. I neither like the idea of sex as a transaction nor as a performance. Sex to me is an act of intimacy between a couple, ideally for the sake of expressing the love and desire for each other and/or for the sake of producing children.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Agriculture Ruined Our Relationship with the Earth, Forest Gardening Can Fix It
    By Ahnenerbe in forum Self-Reliance, Off Grid, & Gardening
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Monday, December 24th, 2018, 03:20 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •