Men on dating ts women

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrimFusion

I'm more content just calling it anal sex. I don't need to be reminded that one of my sexual interests is named after a city in ancient Canaan and the basis of a fucked up set of Bible passages that speak against the act of sodomy as a sin. It's kinda a buzz kill.

---

Actually, sodomy includes oral sex. It's not limited to anal sex. Look it up.

You have to understand; the Bible made it very clear that any sex which wasn't for procreative purposes was a sin. The Bible introduced the concept of thought crimes. That's what coveting is. So what goes through your head is included in the Lord's list of no-nos. And it's the Lord who sanctified the bond between man and woman, and allowed them that small window of opportunity to experience lust. Well, actually enjoying sex is a no-no too, even between husband and wife. God's a stickler.

When would you say you could distinguish men from women, boys from girls, daddy from mommy, brother from sister, etc? I think it's safe to say that even a small child has their working reference points for the concept of binary genders. So, at some point during the socialization process, you learn to go through life with other clothed human being and you have your checklist for boy or girl, and man or woman. Everyone knows when they see another human being what their perception of that person's gender is. Even on an subconscious level, and even if you're confused, you assign them a gender. And that's all that gender is. Forget about genitals. You have a concept of gender that your brain uses socially, and it functions autonomously from your libido. Pre-op transsexuals turn all of your preconceived notions about gender out the window. We're here to re-write the rule book, or simply throw it out and start fucking you without one. If you're a man, and you perceive me as a woman, and if I see myself as a woman, and the world perceives me as a woman; the sex we're having is hetero sex. We're just not having sex with the goal of being fruitful and multiplying.

Quote:

---

If you're a man, and you perceive me as a woman, and if I see myself as a woman, and the world perceives me as a woman; the sex we're having is hetero sex. We're just not having sex with the goal of being fruitful and multiplying.

---

Not quite, the perception between the two people is that the relationship is heterosexual, because one identifies as a woman and one identifies as a man, but this goes back to the difference between perception vs. reality.

By technically adhering to the strictest definition of the words, it would be homosexual sex. This in itself is the biggest conundrum for the community, you didn't turn anything upside down on it's head, everything we know about genders still applies. If you're seen as a woman you'll be treated as such, if you're seen as a man you'll be treated as such. This is what most non-passable tgirls deal with, because the perception of self is constantly being challenged by the outside world, because the outside world is beating you over the head with what they see, their physical reality, that you are in a man's body. This will never change though, because the further we explore the psychology of mankind the more we realize how much of a factor the first 10 million years of our lives had on us as a species. It is like children who come from abused homes, they never heal, only cope with early scars.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mathematics1900

Not quite, the perception between the two people is that the relationship is heterosexual, because one identifies as a woman and one identifies as a man, but this goes back to the difference between perception vs. reality.

By technically adhering to the strictest definition of the words, it would be homosexual sex. This in itself is the biggest conundrum for the community, you didn't turn anything upside down on it's head, everything we know about genders still applies. If you're seen as a woman you'll be treated as such, if you're seen as a man you'll be treated as such. This is what most non-passable tgirls deal with, because the perception of self is constantly being challenged by the outside world, because the outside world is beating you over the head with what they see, their physical reality, that you are in a man's body. This will never change though, because the further we explore the psychology of mankind the more we realize how much of a factor the first 10 million years of our lives had on us as a species. It is like children who come from abused homes, they never heal, only cope with early scars.

---

But the man's libido is registering me as female. The libido is biological. I'm not confused about the internal plumbing. But if and when I confirm that I have Klinefelter's Syndrome, I'd argue that my chromosomes make binary sexuality categories a moot subject with me.

Ancient Roman religion supported sexuality as an aspect of prosperity for the state, and individuals might turn to private religious practice or "magic" for improving their erotic lives or reproductive health. Prostitution was legal, public, and widespread. "Pornographic" paintings were featured among the art collections in respectable upperclass households. It was considered natural and unremarkable for adult males to be sexually attracted to teen-aged youths of both sexes, and pederasty was condoned as long as the younger partner was not a freeborn Roman. "Homosexual" and "heterosexual" did not form the primary dichotomy of Roman thinking about sexuality, and no Latin words for these concepts exist. No moral censure was directed at the adult male who enjoyed sex acts with either women or males of inferior status, as long as his behaviors revealed no weaknesses or excesses, nor infringed on the rights and prerogatives of his male peers. While perceived effeminacy was denounced, sex in moderation with male prostitutes or slaves was not regarded as improper or vitiating to masculinity, if the male citizen took the active and not the receptive role. Hypersexuality, however, was condemned morally and medically in both men and women. -Wikipedia

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buttslinger

While perceived effeminacy was denounced, sex in moderation with male prostitutes or slaves was not regarded as improper or vitiating to masculinity, if the male citizen took the active and not the receptive role.

---

This is a very important part....not regarded as vitiating to masculinity if the male takes the active role....i totally agree....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pimpdog

About the guys not sticking around, alot of girls look ALOT less passable after a guy cums, just the honest truth.

---

Well that's down to the 'Panda effect:
Eats shoots & leaves http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/s...aughing025.gif

Its ironic that most girls in the industry use their cock to be able to pay for surgery...

And the men think they can build their sexual identity around an illusion lol

Are we really bringing religion into this?

Religion is a bunch of hoopla...

Jesus/Mary etc is based on The Egyptian Sun God Same story...

The bible was written to control people at that time...

To scare them into goodness

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KellyShore

Are we really bringing religion into this?

Religion is a bunch of hoopla...

Jesus/Mary etc is based on The Egyptian Sun God Same story...

The bible was written to control people at that time...

To scare them into goodness

---

Huh?

Okay I understand not everyone is in religion or does not believe in god...

But Jesus and Mother mary were actual people with actual evidence that they did exist....

What happened surrounding the stories may have been religious but regardless the people in the bible such as john the baptist, jesus, mary magdalene, Mother mary etc were all real.... Documented and proven.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EvonRose

Huh?

Okay I understand not everyone is in religion or does not believe in god...

But Jesus and Mother mary were actual people with actual evidence that they did exist....

What happened surrounding the stories may have been religious but regardless the people in the bible such as john the baptist, jesus, mary magdalene, Mother mary etc were all real.... Documented and proven.

---

Really give us that evidence Evon???

The town doesn't even exsist...

Watch Religiousless by Bill Mahr...

Or Zeitgeist

Then come back and argue :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KellyShore

Really give us that evidence Evon???

The town doesn't even exsist...

Watch Religiousless by Bill Mahr...

Or Zeitgeist

Then come back and argue :)

---

Bethlehem does exist....

Out of the bible historical record does prove he does exist...

Even einstein who was agnostic stated that Jesus was the best philosopher and teacher...

How about you catch up on history and then come back and argue...

Bethlehem - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EvonRose

Bethlehem does exist....

Out of the bible historical record does prove he does exist...

Even einstein who was agnostic stated that Jesus was the best philosopher and teacher...

How about you catch up on history and then come back and argue...

---

There is no historical evidence to support Jesus ever existed. The scrolls in which his 'teachings' appear were written a long time after his death. During the time Jesus would have live Judea was fully under Roman rule. The Romans were quite good at record-keeping yet no mention of any of the 'events' written of in the New Testament were ever found in their records.

You are young yet and haven't had time on this earth to investigate the historical record. I'm sure that with time your views will change provided you're willing to forgo the religious dogma you currently hold.

The bible besides being a book to teach religion..

people fail to see that the bible is also a historic book... To discredit events that happen int he bible is ignorant, even historians and scientists have proven many various events that actually happened int he bible...

Like the war between the romans

Or the slavery of Jews

various wars, and actual historic people...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mathematics1900

Being used occurs in a lot more industries than the escorting business. Also, not every escort feels used, and even though you feel like that is what you are doing when you see one...using them for sex, not everybody feels the same way. Also I don't recall anyone stating that it is all one sides fault, I'm pretty sure as adults we all understand that every group has bad apples.



You should be making the box you live in larger sir, not smaller.

---

I'm 6'4". My box already needs to be pretty large. Okay, I'm not taking this seriously. I just don't see the point of your counter-argument. I already do a fair amount of playing devil's advocate and trying to approach discussions from more than one standpoint, but even I'd consider it a little picky to include full considerations made for every conceivable minority interest. Just because I may have omitted reference from my post doesn't necessarily mean I wasn't thinking about it. I'd rather speak in generalization instead of adding the word "some" before every referral to a group of people, especially when "some" only excludes a small fraction of that group. I mean, I already get crap for seeming overly-considerate or eager, and explaining my opinions to that extent would only exacerbate that image.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by runningdownthatdream

There is no historical evidence to support Jesus ever existed. The scrolls in which his 'teachings' appear were written a long time after his death. During the time Jesus would have live Judea was fully under Roman rule. The Romans were quite good at record-keeping yet no mention of any of the 'events' written of in the New Testament were ever found in their records.

You are young yet and haven't had time on this earth to investigate the historical record. I'm sure that with time your views will change provided you're willing to forgo the religious dogma you currently hold.

---

Its hard to believe Jesus did not excist... anyway... it does not even really matter. A lot of his teachings have survived time...Read the Nag Hammadi gospels and gnostic text... as well as the stories that did not make it into the bible.
Mary Magdaline was Jezus favorite apostel... but she was censored out by the men and church authorities around 300 AC.

Its really hard to believe Jesus did not excist... Because his teachings do.

Yeah, it is kinda hard to believe he didn't exist

If other apostle and historical figures existed, including Mary Magdalene who have hard historic proof...Then why did she mention Jesus in her books and her personal relationship with him..

You people underestimate ancient civilization..

And if one person writes a book, then another person writes a book, and history writes a textbooks and it matches...

Obviously there is something there.

Every good story has just enough truth to make it plausible. So does every religion.

While there are individuals and places in the Bible that are corroborated with historical evidence, the keyword is some. Jesus is not verified through contemporary accounts the way Mohammad was, but is a figure that might be completely symbolic, allegorical or fictional. Same for Socrates and some other philosophers of Antiquity.

"There are no contemporary witnesses to the life and death of Joshua of Nazareth, who came to be known in the Greek-speaking world as Jesus Christ (the king)."

Norman Cantor

Wow, this topic has sure degenerated and it's my fault.
I really wish this didn't turn into a discussion about the validity of religious texts, but if that's the way it goes, here's my two cents; Religion in just about every form is more about social control than salvation. The Bible isn't a bad book, but it does little more than instill moral values by inciting fear of eternal damnation. Personally, I don't need to visualize burning in an eternal lake of fire to keep from murdering or thieving from people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jackal

While there are individuals and places in the Bible that are corroborated with historical evidence, the keyword is some. Jesus is not verified through contemporary accounts the way Mohammad was, but is a figure that might be completely symbolic, allegorical or fictional. Same for Socrates and some other philosophers of Antiquity.

"There are no contemporary witnesses to the life and death of Joshua of Nazareth, who came to be known in the Greek-speaking world as Jesus Christ (the king)."

Norman Cantor

---

It does not matter. lol
The teaching of Jezus were avant garde anyway.
If someone like Jesus existed today... he would be crucified again :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nicole Dupre

Every good story has just enough truth to make it plausible. So does every religion.

---

Exactly not every miracle story means it's the truth, sometimes exaggerated, but regardless the truth is the source...

I't s dumb for people to discredit jewish slaves being freed from egypt just because the ocean split in two... People fail to see that jews really did get free and lived in the desert for a few years before residing.

Quote:

---

But the man's libido is registering me as female. The libido is biological. I'm not confused about the internal plumbing. But if and when I confirm that I have Klinefelter's Syndrome, I'd argue that my chromosomes make binary sexuality categories a moot subject with me.

---

Tyler Durden actually posted a rather mind blowing video; Authors@Google: Ogi Ogas - YouTube. The man libido I believe doesn't register things as female, or male, I believe male libido is simply either on, or off. Which is why men were able to be sent into a frenzy at seeing a woman's ankle back in the day.

After reading a little about that syndrome, I am not sure if they would be able to do anything besides hormone treatments to send you one way or the other. Do they actually talk about any treatments for the syndrome or is it just a, take it as is condition?

Quote:

---

Well that's down to the 'Panda effect:
Eats shoots & leaves

---

Lol, funny.

Quote:

---

Watch Religiousless by Bill Mahr...

---

Oh how I love Bill Maher!

Quote:

---

I'm 6'4". My box already needs to be pretty large. Okay, I'm not taking this seriously. I just don't see the point of your counter-argument. I already do a fair amount of playing devil's advocate and trying to approach discussions from more than one standpoint, but even I'd consider it a little picky to include full considerations made for every conceivable minority interest. Just because I may have omitted reference from my post doesn't necessarily mean I wasn't thinking about it. I'd rather speak in generalization instead of adding the word "some" before every referral to a group of people, especially when "some" only excludes a small fraction of that group. I mean, I already get crap for seeming overly-considerate or eager, and explaining my opinions to that extent would only exacerbate that image.

---

Bwahahahahaha, why in the hell would you say you're 6'4"? The comment about the box was a metaphor, lol. If you actually did realize those other areas existed you would of included the word some, because it changes the entire meaning of the sentence! Yes, I am going to force you to say what you mean, and I am going to challenge you on concepts that I feel you have a narrow view of, and that is exactly why I made my post. So if you're too lazy to include the word 'some' when putting thoughts to words then you will forever be harangued by me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EvonRose

The bible besides being a book to teach religion..

people fail to see that the bible is also a historic book... To discredit events that happen int he bible is ignorant, even historians and scientists have proven many various events that actually happened int he bible...

Like the war between the romans

Or the slavery of Jews

various wars, and actual historic people...

---

What historians and scientists? Any names of their publications? I am not an Egyptologist but I do know that the narratives about Egypt in the Bible are erroneous at best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KittyPride

It does not matter. lol
The teaching of Jezus were avant garde anyway.
If someone like Jesus existed today... he would be crucified again :D

---

I never said Jesus' teachings had no wisdom(there is, although he did not invent the Golden Rule) or importance to them(outside the obvious fact that Christianity would spread and gain prominence in the last dozen plus centuries) , but the question as to whether or not he exists is separate to that. I think it is either ignorant or dishonest to say that he is a historical individual without evidence to support that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jackal

While there are individuals and places in the Bible that are corroborated with historical evidence, the keyword is some. Jesus is not verified through contemporary accounts the way Mohammad was, but is a figure that might be completely symbolic, allegorical or fictional. Same for Socrates and some other philosophers of Antiquity.

"There are no contemporary witnesses to the life and death of Joshua of Nazareth, who came to be known in the Greek-speaking world as Jesus Christ (the king)."

Norman Cantor

---

Yes but Mary Magdalene was

John the Baptist

numerous Roman leader...

Egyptian leaders...

they all mention Jesus exactly the same... So why discredit them? It's not like you have proof that the person they all describe isn't jesus.

And many Historians agree that he does exist.

So are we suppose to make our own assumption or go by scientific, and hard studies?

There more proof that he existed both from biblical and secular books, than proof he never existed at all... There is tons of evidence to support he existed...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EvonRose

Yeah, it is kinda hard to believe he didn't exist

If other apostle and historical figures existed, including Mary Magdalene who have hard historic proof...Then why did she mention Jesus in her books and her personal relationship with him..

You people underestimate ancient civilization..

And if one person writes a book, then another person writes a book, and history writes a textbooks and it matches...

Obviously there is something there.

---

Evon, you might not believe this but the people who write religious texts are writing to influence the beliefs and actions of others. Religious texts aren't written from an objective point of view and therefore should not be read objectively. You are correct that some events in the Old and New Testament can be corroborated. But often ideas are given life - i.e.: many ideas taken together can be used to construct a person, an embodiment of the idea, if you will. Jesus is likely such a construct. If you truly know your history you will know there are dozens of stories that are much much older than the story of Jesus which have almost identical characteristics.

As far as underestimating ancient civilization, you are correct. However, I'd point you to Sumerian writings that are much older or even the Vedic writings. Based on your belief in the bible do you hold that the Sumerian and Hindu gods and teachings are also totally valid?

Anyway we as transwoman should perhaps be busy with the Magna Mater then with christian beliefs :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EvonRose

Yes but Mary Magdalene was

John the Baptist

numerous Roman leader...

Egyptian leaders...

they all mention Jesus exactly the same... So why discredit them? It's not like you have proof that the person they all describe isn't jesus.

And many Historians agree that he does exist.

So are we suppose to make our own assumption or go by scientific, and hard studies?

There more proof that he existed both from biblical and secular books, than proof he never existed at all...

---

So what if scripture mentions historical figures? That does not demonstrate that everyone in the narratives were actual, real-life persons. I could make up a story about a fictional character that involves a real world leader but that would not be evidence in favor of the existence of the fictional character. Are the gods, demigods and monsters of Greek mythology real because their narratives often involved real life people and places? Is Forrest Gump a real life person because his story involved the names of Kennedy, LBJ, Nixon, etc.? I am not setting the bar to a scientific but to a historical level. Like Socrates and unlike the prophet Mohammad, Jesus had no contemporary witnesses or evidence to support that he was a real, living, breathing person. Conflicting gospels written decades after his death are not contemporary as they are not from his lifetime. If you would like to suggest reading books by these scientists and historians you keep mentioning, I'd be glad to check them out at the library.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by runningdownthatdream

Evon, you might not believe this but the people who write religious texts are writing to influence the beliefs and actions of others. Religious texts aren't written from an objective point of view and therefore should not be read objectively. You are correct that some events in the Old and New Testament can be corroborated. But often ideas are given life - i.e.: many ideas taken together can be used to construct a person, an embodiment of the idea, if you will. Jesus is likely such a construct. If you truly know your history you will know there are dozens of stories that are much much older than the story of Jesus which have almost identical characteristics.

As far as underestimating ancient civilization, you are correct. However, I'd point you to Sumerian writings that are much older or even the Vedic writings. Based on your belief in the bible do you hold that the Sumerian and Hindu gods and teachings are also totally valid?

---

I am not talking about the teachings because deity is a personal belief in to or not.

The bible is a historical book, not just some religious thing... many of the the events int he bible, many people, may kings, and priests, have been proven to happen.. So to discredit the reality of the bible to me is just fear in believing in it. I get people don't believe in god, But jesus was not a god in secular facts, he was a living flesh and blood. And many of the people who have been proven to exist have had personal relationships with him...

How can you discredit that? Plus Roman history? Mind you Romans didn't believe in god, or were not friends of the Jews... There was no religious backing behind it, pure history.

I love running and Jackal points

And there is so much scientific evidence to refute claims

And there will only be more

And it will be shocking and hilarious when it's proven it's hoopla

Lmao at it being called a historical book

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EvonRose

I am not talking about the teachings because deity is a personal belief in to or not.

The bible is a historical book, not just some religious thing... many of the the events int he bible, many people, may kings, and priests, have been proven to happen.. So to discredit the reality of the bible to me is just fear in believing in it. I get people don't believe in god, But jesus was not a god in secular facts, he was a living flesh and blood. And many of the people who have been proven to exist have had personal relationships with him...

How can you discredit that? Plus Roman history? Mind you Romans didn't believe in god, or were not friends of the Jews... There was no religious backing behind it, pure history.

---

What makes "Jesus" "God" more true

Than the Greek Gods?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jackal

So what if scripture mentions historical figures? That does not demonstrate that everyone in the narratives were actual, real-life persons. I could make up a story about a fictional character that involves a real world leader but that would not be evidence in favor of the existence of the fictional character. Are the gods, demigods and monsters of Greek mythology real because their narratives often involved real life people and places? Is Forrest Gump a real life person because his story involved the names of Kennedy, LBJ, Nixon, etc.? I am not setting the bar to a scientific but to a historical level. Like Socrates and unlike the prophet Mohammad, Jesus had no contemporary witnesses or evidence to support that he was a real, living, breathing person. Conflicting gospels written decades after his death are not contemporary as they are not from his lifetime. If you would like to suggest reading books by these scientists and historians you keep mentioning, I'd be glad to check them out at the library.

---

Jesus IS too good to be true...
Sure Mohammed really existed lol.

Josephus Flavius
Pliny the Younger
Tacitus
Suetonius
Talmud
Letters of Pontius Pilate
Cornelius Tacitus
Lucian of Samosata
Thallus and Phlegon
Mara Bar-Serapion
Josephus
The four Gospels

Kids start looking in your public library, or ebay...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KellyShore

What makes "Jesus" "God" more true

Than the Greek Gods?

---

They are not more true.
There are good stories and bad stories :D

It really is not important if Jesus really existed.
His teachings are fascinating.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KellyShore

What makes "Jesus" "God" more true

Than the Greek Gods?

---

Nobody said he was god here..

From secular point of view he was an actual human, only believed to be a god.

It's matter of challenging one's mind to actually read the bible, and then matching them up with secular books, and evidence.

People would be surprised to learn many events in the bible actually happened in historical accounts.

It's just a matter of opening up your horizon and separating religion from history...

I heard Big Foot is real.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by italianamerican25

I heard Big Foot is real.

---

No but the Giant squid is...

Quote:

---

I heard Big Foot is real.

---

The funny thing about this is they are now starting to speculate that it is possible there is another primate out there that is smart enough to avoid humans, and has the ability to survive in the woods. A creature that could easily be confused as The Big Foot. There is something to multiple sightings of the same creature all over the world in the same type of terrain. Chupacabra? They finally figured out what it was...some strange breed of dog.

How about the Boogyman?