Thread: Slavic Women

Originally Posted by Rosa Anna

Money is definately a repellent.

Originally Posted by Rosa Anna

Grey hair is hot, ironically, natural too. Smurf.

Cool! I have no money and grey hair. Let's get married Rosa.

Anna Rosa I am entitled to my opinion I dont like grey hair.

Just because YOU PERSONALLY disagree does not what I think b.s.

[quote=kwatts59]

Originally Posted by Rosa Anna

Money is definately a repellent.

Originally Posted by "Rosa Anna":1h6q7ru4

Grey hair is hot, ironically, natural too. Smurf.

Cool! I have no money and grey hair. Let's get married Rosa. [/quote:1h6q7ru4] ......where'd I put that shovel..I need to dig myself out! :P

I guess I am too old for you Biancca.

I hope you find your hot stud someday.

To me, looks dont mean much. Personality and loyalty is more important.

Originally Posted by kwatts59

I guess I am too old for you Biancca.

I hope you find your hot stud someday.

To me, looks dont mean much. Personality and loyalty is more important.

oh your hilarious sweetie. It's not that. I'm even from vegas sort of-been away 27 years. I am not a Christian, it just wouldn't work. Besides, I see stud in unconventional ways. One of my current facinations is slightly over weight and has the most beautiful crooked teeth. Not that I'm his type-he is just drop dead georgeous. I prefer not to follow some sheepherder fad setter who dictates what is and what is not beauty. Personally, I find "perfect" to be somewhat ugly. Imperfections rock. My perogative. No offense taken Bianca, I just found your potbellied pig comment a tad calous and immature. You sound pretty young-good luck with your language though.

edit: oh.... whoops...you said Bianca..yeah your waaaaaaay too old and grey and all human like. You know who I think is really gad awful ugly? Ken. Ken is one ugly doll.

I've just polled 50 women aged 20 - 30, 47 of them said that gray hair was hot.

"Polled"?

Yeah verbing is great, isn

Originally Posted by mike

The lesson to be learned is not that men need to stop cheating: it is that monogamy is religious @@@@ contrary to genetics. ...
... .... .. And don't let some priest or Dr. Phil tell you otherwise.

Spot on mike! And I'm not paying you lip service. It is extremely hard to accept it, especially if you come from a christain background like me where you have been feeded all your life those stories about love, princesses and knights. Haha. Just @@@@ enjoy your life

Mating loyalty is just a GENE! HaHa (I remember reading that article about the voles in the Economist) I'm sure if that's that funny. That illusion of "love for life, free from desire" was somehow confortable.

I wish www.transhumanism.org though; so we can switch on/off that gene, at will! Yeah!

Originally Posted by kalinka_vinnie

What you are saying, is that YOU will cheat on your wife, if you ever get one? Right? Unless you are a, b or c?

Yes but let's not call it cheating... ok? Because your wife will probably also mate a stud if the opportuinity shows up. Just accept it. oh god that's hard hey! Just that kids should not suffer. Kids' education should be the most important thing! That's really important IMO.

You are supposed to fight forever to seduce your partner, and vice versa. Why? Because it is often the confort of marriage that kills a relationship, the confort that brings the repetition, the routine and the bore.


I'm still young and haven't decided yet how I will play the game with my futur wife though. Emotions are @@@@@ hard to deal with, with I guess with some training and self-control it goes all fine .

I just want my children to have a father.

But I guess that's too much to ask in today's society.

Thank you Kwatts59 for aknowledging that personality does matter. I would rather be with an ugly, funny man than a hot boring one.

In fact I don't want to be with a hot man at all because he will cheat for sure. [/quote]

No I wouldn't.

Woman aren't any more loyal than men are. They just have a different way of srewing him about. Men treat women like crud the masculine way ie. "show us ur tits love!", and women do it the feminine way ie. scoffing at every move he makes and expecting him to be a woman, another one of her girlfriends. Less men would cheat if they weren't expect to act like chicks. If women allowed men to be men, they'd not feel the need to go elsewhere to feel like a man. It works both ways. Men wrongfully expect women to stop complaining even when there are legit reasons to complain. Of course, there are always exceptions to the stereotypes. There are couples who don't starve each other of their respective genders. No-one ever hears about these couples. Why? Because these aren't the types of people who talk loud, so you never hear them. They blend into the woodwork.

God, you guys make it seem like that all there is to life is to have sex and with as many people as possible! Man, am I glad that I am a tree!

I would say 90% of the reason why marriages fail is that people nowadays marry mostly based on looks and the feeling people get that it is time to settle and have kids. I don't believe in that there is only one person for every one, but people could be alot wiser in their decisions if they weren't blinded by sex, status and money (and even desperation).

Mordan, it is only cheating if you do it without your wife's consent. If you happen to have a wife that encourages this sort of behaviour, you hit the jackpot! Just don't feel jelaous when she is "having fun" with your obnoxious neighbour.

Man, am I glad that I am a tree!

Originally Posted by kalinka_vinnie

Mike, I hate to disagree with you, beacuse you are a moderator, and before I know it you will turn my avatar into something highly embarrasing involving sheep, but it is that very attitude you are exhibiting is called deevolution.

We took the step away from the animal kingdom and if you want to go back to the realm where you act solely on your instincts and your feelings, be my guest. You will feel that you will become a serial murderer, greedy egoist, rapist, alcoholic, narcotic, etc. Because what animals lack is: Morality, High Level of self-control, Respect for their equals, Ethics, and so forth.

Hm, I don't really understand how you can arrive at that conclusion. If we look at our closest relatives, apes and monkeys and such, do we see what you are describing? I don't know of too many reports of chimpanzees strung out on crack killing every other ape they see and leaving mysterious clues for the chimp police. In fact, I think we can break it down as such:

Serial murder, rape, drug addiction - Primal instincts? No. On the contrary, almost always due to underlying psychological problems. Well, going back to the rape I suppose one could argue that is "natural" seeing as how it is widely believed to have been how mating originally started in humans (as in many millions of other animals)--although when a neighborhood dog mounts your cocker spaniel nobody has the melodramatic cajones to call it "rape."

Egoism - Primal instinct? It seems doubtful from the high amount of social organization, cooperation, and altruism found in most primates. On the contrary here, egoism usually either comes from rational evaluation (as is the case with most capitalist and, surprise, egoistic philosophies) or immaturity (which, again, would fall under psychological problems rather than "instincts").

What you are saying, is that YOU will cheat on your wife, if you ever get one? Right? Unless you are a, b or c?

What I am saying is: it is as humanly natural to get bored with your mate after awhile and be attracted to other members of the opposite sex as it is to feel the pull of emotion when you see someone drowning in the ocean. You can use reason to circumvent your natural instincts, but one most have the maturity to admit they are doing so rather than try to claim that because their culture and religion make them think sex is "bad" and that sex with people other than their wife/husband is "ten times as bad," somehow this behavior is human nature instead. It definitely is not.

Originally Posted by kalinka_vinnie

Mordan, it is only cheating if you do it without your wife's consent. If you happen to have a wife that encourages this sort of behaviour, you hit the jackpot! Just don't feel jelaous when she is "having fun" with your obnoxious neighbour.

And here we have you coming to the same conclusion that I wished you to: the root of the so-called cheating problem is jealousy. It is the same greedy egoism which you claim to be opposed to--this sense that someone becomes your property and yours alone when you enter a legal contract of ownership. It is this self-absorbed childishness mixed with dogmatic mumbo-jumbo that must be overcome if you really want to take a step away from the animal kingdom.

Thus endeth the sermon. Peace be with you and your sexcapades.

Originally Posted by kalinka_vinnie

(and even desperation)

There you have it, as far as I'm concerned. (I'm not assuming you're agreeing with the rest I'm about to say, though)
People are afraid to be alone. That is why people gravitate toward certain people even when part of them knows it's not going to work. People who rave about sex, or rave about its abstainence are the ones who are the most afraid. Sure, some people casually and honestly acknowledge their enjoyment of sex, or their passion for abstainence as part of their peronalities. But many just talk loud, pretending that they're in control and are calling the shots in their own sexual actions.
"To be a better player than sex" is a goal of mine, and I don't guage my success of this by what I do, but by how little desperation is behind my actions. Am I deciding? Or is sex deciding? And people who say "No Brett, you may think you're deciding, but sex always calls the shots at the end of the day" are just projecting their own inabilities onto others. To claim that sex is an inevitable, is to fail to admit to yourself that there's something that can be done about handling this urge the way I'd like, but I'm not succeeding to do it.

@Mike's post and the 2nd post he's quoting.

Yes, there's no psychological correlation between serial killers and the non-human kingdom. (Bar the ape's tendency toward infanticide and intelligence-inflicted phenomenon). The actions may look the same. One may see blood and think "Woah, same thing". But the mentality behind it it 100% opposite. The animal gets pleasure out of the surviving, and the blood is the unfortunate means of achieving it. Whereas the serial killer has the blood being the means unto itself. Animals avoid deadly conflict at all costs, serial killers do not. They seek it out. And I don't buy into the idea that it's purely self-serving that is why animals avoid conflict. They may not philosophise about morality, but morality is innate. For immorality to occur, perversion of intelligence is required to over-ride the balance of the self and the all else. Non-humans (except apes and other animals on the verge of intellect beyond thier own ability to control) simply aren't smart enought to develop immorality. Amorality, yes. But amorality is neutral, therefore a positive in comparison to immorality.

Originally Posted by mike

Well, going back to the rape I suppose one could argue that is "natural" seeing as how it is widely believed to have been how mating originally started in humans (as in many millions of other animals)--although when a neighborhood dog mounts your cocker spaniel nobody has the melodramatic cajones to call it "rape."

Dogs are not capable of rape. A stud simply cannot force a bitch to mate. And never does. Male chimps, on the other hand, do rape females all the time. I guess our instincts are much closer to those of chimps than those of dogs. But I really wouldn't like to live in chimps "sociaty".

Originally Posted by mike

I don't know of too many reports of chimpanzees strung out on crack killing every other ape they see and leaving mysterious clues for the chimp police.

Of course you don't, because they don't have the ability to do the same things we do. Where would a monkey get a hold of heroine? The point is, that if we replace kalinka_vinnie with a monkey and taught him the works, despite having a higher IQ than kalinka_vinnie, he would go to the liqour store and get drunk every night. They have no self-control. And you see such people today...

If we did what animals do (kill rivals, have sex with any the opposite sex we find attractive) we would become serial murderers and rapists, no?

Originally Posted by mike

although when a neighborhood dog mounts your cocker spaniel nobody has the melodramatic cajones to call it "rape."

Exactly! If a neighbor mounts your wife (against her will), do people call it rape? That is why we are NOT animals.

Originally Posted by mike

What I am saying is: it is as humanly natural to get bored with your mate after awhile and be attracted to other members of the opposite sex as it is to feel the pull of emotion when you see someone drowning in the ocean. You can use reason to circumvent your natural instincts

Our natural instinct is to be bored with our mate? Well even if it is our natural instinct to have many sex parterners, we have the MORALITY to overcome our primal instincts

Originally Posted by mike

And here we have you coming to the same conclusion that I wished you to: the root of the so-called cheating problem is jealousy. It is the same greedy egoism which you claim to be opposed to--this sense that someone becomes your property and yours alone when you enter a legal contract of ownership.

I think you are jumping to my wrong conclusion I could very well see Mordan being jelaous in that situation, because their relationship isn't based on love. There you have another thing to chew on, do animals LOVE?

If two people love each other, they trust each other, and are not jelaous. It can happen! You all are just pessimists!

Dogs do attempt rape, actually. It simply doesn't have the same meaning as human rape. Human rape is a deep psychological attack done through physical means, whereas in animals it's a superficial act without the intent on traumatizing the rapee. <word?