Sex With Ugly Men

[Brianne_24]

Let's start with this pile. I double asterisk-ed the more notable part. The rest was too much to edit on my device. I'm lazy right now.

You're condescending and if you don't realize it in informing you: You are talking down to us, correcting us and basically calling us liars. With lots of words.

It's rude. I don't like it. I'd appreciate it if you cut it the fuck out.

Did I reach any conclusions that anyone here was definitively a liar, or did I insinuate I don't know for sure either way, while pointing out that if you were telling the truth, you're more of an exception than a rule? I'm not sure what was condescending about my statement or anything else in that post.

I hate to say it, but I feel like things might have escalated now to a point where you're taking all of this more personally than you need to be. Unless you're doing this purely out of the spirit of adversarial fun or you just need to vent, which also seems possible. ^_^

Again, I'm not editing this pile of text but this is the post where ya admitted to attempt to manipulatively phrase your posts to me to "gauge my reaction"

Maybe next time just ask me straight up? Would appreciate that greatly.

Apologies, T_n_J, but in my experience you always get more truthful answers when asking more loaded/emotionally provocative questions instead of asking straight up while granting good faith every time, hope you understand where I'm coming from. ^_^

What I'm picking up on, if it's ok to mention it in a public setting, is a possible sensitivity you might have to harmful manipulation, not just screening. I'm not sure what your past is like, but you exhibit a reaction similar to myself ten years ago, and friends and family who've endured gaslighting. While what I did ITT wasn't gaslighting, it's possible the "manipulativeness" of it might have triggered something in your mind that reminded you of the trauma of enduring more harmful manipulation like that. If this is true I apologize, though please keep in mind that asking a loaded screening question or two is very different from intentionally causing any psychological harm.

TnJ has quoted you above. You know what you're doing, so don't play ignorant.

Faux humility is tedious.

You're saying you think I have an ulterior motive now? Oh interesting. Why, and what do you think it is? I invite you to call it out so we can talk about it if you'd like.

 

[Tight_N_Juicy]

Did I reach any conclusions that anyone here was definitively a liar, or did I insinuate I don't know for sure either way, while pointing out that if you were telling the truth, you're more of an exception than a rule? I'm not sure what was condescending about my statement or anything else in that post.

I hate to say it, but I feel like things might have escalated now to a point where you're taking all of this more personally than you need to be. Unless you're doing this purely out of the spirit of adversarial fun or you just need to vent, which also seems possible. ^_^



Apologies, T_n_J, but in my experience you always get more truthful answers when asking more loaded/emotionally provocative questions instead of asking straight up while granting good faith every time, hope you understand where I'm coming from. ^_^

What I'm picking up on, if it's ok to mention it in a public setting, is a possible sensitivity you might have to harmful manipulation, not just screening. I'm not sure what your past is like, but you exhibit a reaction similar to myself ten years ago, and friends and family who've endured gaslighting. While what I did ITT wasn't gaslighting, it's possible the "manipulativeness" of it might have triggered something in your mind that reminded you of the trauma of enduring more harmful manipulation like that. If this is true I apologize, though please keep in mind that asking a loaded screening question or two is very different from intentionally causing psychological harm.






You're saying you think I have an ulterior motive now? Oh interesting. Why, and what do you think it is? I invite you to call it out so we can talk about it if you'd like.

More than one person here has told you that your approach is annoying. Maybe take a step back and let that sink in.

I think your motive is to make yourself look like the ultimate honest woman of the site by questioning whether or not the rest of us is being honest or just trying to appeal to or appease male readers.

I think you want attention, and you're getting it. Blunt is my thing.

 

[Tight_N_Juicy]

You can get attention and admiration without shitting on the other women who frequent the site.

If you don't want me questioning your motives don't pull manipulative bullshit like a smart-ass.

 

[deleted924715]

Did I reach any conclusions that anyone here was definitively a liar, or did I insinuate I don't know for sure either way, while pointing out that if you were telling the truth, you're more of an exception than a rule? I'm not sure what was condescending about my statement or anything else in that post.

I hate to say it, but I feel like things might have escalated now to a point where you're taking all of this more personally than you need to be. Unless you're doing this purely out of the spirit of adversarial fun or you just need to vent, which also seems possible. ^_^



Apologies, T_n_J, but in my experience you always get more truthful answers when asking more loaded/emotionally provocative questions instead of asking straight up while granting good faith every time, hope you understand where I'm coming from. ^_^

What I'm picking up on, if it's ok to mention it in a public setting, is a possible sensitivity you might have to harmful manipulation, not just screening. I'm not sure what your past is like, but you exhibit a reaction similar to myself ten years ago, and friends and family who've endured gaslighting. While what I did ITT wasn't gaslighting, it's possible the "manipulativeness" of it might have triggered something in your mind that reminded you of the trauma of enduring more harmful manipulation like that. If this is true I apologize, though please keep in mind that asking a loaded screening question or two is very different from intentionally causing psychological harm.






You're saying you think I have an ulterior motive now? Why, and what do you think it is? I invite you to call it out so we can talk about it.

I'm pretty sure I said your faux humility was tedious and *you* just said ulterior motive. I said you know what you're doing (being tedious). It really doesn't take critical thinking skills, PMs or calling out to follow along... Not for anyone else on the thread anyway.

 

[Brianne_24]

More than one person here has told you that your approach is annoying. Maybe take a step back and let that sink in.

I think your motive is to make yourself look like the ultimate honest woman of the site by questioning whether or not the rest of us is being honest or just trying to appeal to or appease male readers.

I think you want attention, and you're getting it. Blunt is my thing.

I'm actually getting quite a bit more attention that I anticipated or think is even warranted

Your claim that I'm questioning you're honesty: I stopped questioning it a long time ago, so not sure why we're still talking about this or why anything i'm saying could still be considered provocative.

Regarding your claim that I'm trying to appeal to LPSG's male readers (I'm assuming you mean the toxic ones), I've already proven this is not the case. But as mentioned, due to the heavy "women vs toxic men" gender war dynamic that sets the tone of all interaction on this forum, having a more nuanced conversation ITT is very difficult without making it seem like you're taking a side. The last two pages have proven my point. Most toxic men here know I think they're trash, they only want to see the women here who make them look stupid on a consistent basis take an L for once. So the domino effect of a moment where it seems like I'm schooling them in a way that makes them come off as unreasonable one time (even if true, everyone has moments of being unreasonable sometimes - we're human) might make some of them want to root for me to "win". In reality, they too losery to realize that this was never the goal. But because of the gender war dynamic on a toxic forum like this, it's impossible to have the in-depth conversations I'm interested in having without it causing some issues here, and that's on me.

You can get attention and admiration without shitting on the other women who frequent the site.

If you don't want me questioning your motives don't pull manipulative bullshit like a smart-ass.

I couldn't care less about admiration. You want to know my agenda? here it is: I think forums like this are one of many spots on the internet that contribute greatly to harming the sociopolitical climate and the healthiness of discourse on topics about sex, gender, relationships (not to mention race, LGBTQA, class and more) etc. At the end of the day, both men and women become radicalized into taking on more toxic behaviors here. It's a conundrum to me that any feminists, women, etc still tolerate this place enough to stay, but that's a whole other topic.

The political conversations here are so toxic because everything orbits around the population of toxic male losers that infest this place. They set the tone for everything. I just hate misinformation and arguments that are not as thoughtful and well researched as they could be. My degree technically makes me qualified to do something about this. Do I also have issues with social skills and communication? yes. But at the end of the day I can't help but want to call out ANY misinformation when I see it, regardless of how right or wrong the person exhibiting it is. It genuinely bothers me and I think the amount of it on the internet is one of the great problems of our time. But at this point it's probably a fool's quest to expect to change anything about the quality of discourse here.

I'm pretty sure I said your faux humility was tedious and *you* just said ulterior motive. I said you know what you're doing (being tedious). It really doesn't take critical thinking skills, PMs or calling out to follow along... Not for anyone else on the thread anyway.

This is what I'm talking about (though far from one of the worst examples as this person isn't very toxic). "Faux humility, ulterior motives, tediousness". So many claims, yet no evidence to base them on. My offer to have a heart to heart conversation about their claims ignored yet again in favor of a continually escalating gamified argument to score a "win" and enact revenge on the person that slighted them, nothing more. These are reactions of anger, probably based on years of habitually arguing on the internet with actual haters and constantly having to deal with their toxic ulterior motives. On a healthy forum, a productive conversation would have happened and ended by now. This is what a place like this does to you. This forum is like cancer for mental and emotional health.

 

[Tight_N_Juicy]

I'm actually getting quite a bit more attention that I anticipated or think is even warranted

Your claim that I'm questioning you're honesty: I stopped questioning it a long time ago, so not sure why we're still talking about this or why anything i'm saying could still be considered provocative.

Regarding your claim that I'm trying to appeal to LPSG's male readers (I'm assuming you mean the toxic ones), I've already proven this is not the case. But as mentioned, due to the heavy "women vs toxic men" gender war dynamic that sets the tone of all interaction on this forum, having a more nuanced conversation ITT is very difficult without making it seem like you're taking a side. The last two pages have proven my point. Most toxic men here know I think they're trash, they only want to see the women here who make them look stupid on a consistent basis take an L for once. So the domino effect of a moment where it seems like I'm schooling them in a way that makes them come off as unreasonable one time (even if true, everyone has moments of being unreasonable sometimes - we're human) might make some of them want to root for me to "win". In reality, they too losery to realize that this was never the goal. But because of the gender war dynamic on a toxic forum like this, it's impossible to have the in-depth conversations I'm interested in having without it causing some issues here, and that's on me.



I couldn't care less about admiration. You want to know my agenda? here it is: I think forums like this are one of many spots on the internet that contribute greatly to harming the sociopolitical climate and the healthiness of discourse on topics about sex, gender, relationships (not to mention race, LGBTQA, class and more) etc. At the end of the day, both men and women become radicalized into taking on more toxic behaviors here. It's a conundrum to me that any feminists, women, etc still tolerate this place enough to stay, but that's a whole other topic.

The political conversations here are so toxic because everything orbits around the population of toxic male losers that infest this place. They set the tone for everything. I just hate misinformation and arguments that are not as thoughtful and well researched as they could be. My degree technically makes me qualified to do something about this. Do I also have issues with social skills and communication? yes. But at the end of the day I can't help but want to call out ANY misinformation when I see it, regardless of how right or wrong the person exhibiting it is. It genuinely bothers me and I think the amount of it on the internet is one of the great problems of our time. But at this point it's probably a fool's quest to expect to change anything about the quality of discourse here.



This is what I'm talking about (though far from one of the worst examples as this person isn't very toxic). "Faux humility, ulterior motives, tediousness". So many claims, yet no evidence to base them on. My offer to have a heart to heart conversation about their claims ignored yet again in favor of a continually escalating gamified argument to score a "win" and enact revenge on the person that slighted them, nothing more. These are reactions of anger, probably based on years of habitually arguing on the internet with actual haters and constantly having to deal with their toxic ulterior motives. On a healthy forum, a productive conversation would have happened and ended by now. This is what a place like this does to you. This forum is like cancer for mental and emotional health.

Basically I'll just sum it up..

You pulled some shit that didn't sit well with me and I called you on it. You're still not seeing what's being placed right in front of your face (although I can't deny, I'm not buying it) and now we're going in circles.

I'll just ask that in the future you make your points without manipulation or questioning the sincerity of the other women responding.

And again... I don't care how smart you wanna look. Your degree means fuckall to me. Have a day. Edit: the reason the degree means nada? You're not going to post it here so how am I supposed to take that credential as genuine? Anyone can throw around "I have a degree so I know what I'm talking about" but unless you're in a space where you can verify that shit it's useless to bring up.

 

[deleted924715]

I'm actually getting quite a bit more attention that I anticipated or think is even warranted

Your claim that I'm questioning you're honesty: I stopped questioning it a long time ago, so not sure why we're still talking about this or why anything i'm saying could still be considered provocative.

Regarding your claim that I'm trying to appeal to LPSG's male readers (I'm assuming you mean the toxic ones), I've already proven this is not the case. But as mentioned, due to the heavy "women vs toxic men" gender war dynamic that sets the tone of all interaction on this forum, having a more nuanced conversation ITT is very difficult without making it seem like you're taking a side. The last two pages have proven my point. Most toxic men here know I think they're trash, they only want to see the women here who make them look stupid on a consistent basis take an L for once. So the domino effect of a moment where it seems like I'm schooling them in a way that makes them come off as unreasonable one time (even if true, everyone has moments of being unreasonable sometimes - we're human) might make some of them want to root for me to "win". In reality, they too losery to realize that this was never the goal. But because of the gender war dynamic on a toxic forum like this, it's impossible to have the in-depth conversations I'm interested in having without it causing some issues here, and that's on me.



I couldn't care less about admiration. You want to know my agenda? here it is: I think forums like this are one of many spots on the internet that contribute greatly to harming the sociopolitical climate and the healthiness of discourse on topics about sex, gender, relationships (not to mention race, LGBTQA, class and more) etc. At the end of the day, both men and women become radicalized into taking on more toxic behaviors here. It's a conundrum to me that any feminists, women, etc still tolerate this place enough to stay, but that's a whole other topic.

The political conversations here are so toxic because everything orbits around the population of toxic male losers that infest this place. They set the tone for everything. I just hate misinformation and arguments that are not as thoughtful and well researched as they could be. My degree technically makes me qualified to do something about this. Do I also have issues with social skills and communication? yes. But at the end of the day I can't help but want to call out ANY misinformation when I see it, regardless of how right or wrong the person exhibiting it is. It genuinely bothers me and I think the amount of it on the internet is one of the great problems of our time. But at this point it's probably a fool's quest to expect to change anything about the quality of discourse here.



This is what I'm talking about (though far from one of the worst examples as this person isn't very toxic). "Faux humility, ulterior motives, tediousness". So many claims, yet no evidence to base them on. My offer to have a heart to heart conversation about their claims ignored yet again in favor of a continually escalating gamified argument to score a "win" and enact revenge on the person that slighted them, nothing more. These are reactions of anger, probably based on years of habitually arguing on the internet with actual haters and constantly having to deal with their toxic ulterior motives. On a healthy forum, a productive conversation would have happened and ended by now. This is what a place like this does to you. This forum is like cancer for mental and emotional health.

Are you angry because I don't buy your faux humility? You sound kinda angry. I'm sorry you feel that way and I'll allow that you are possibly not lying

 

[MickeyLee]

Can't reply right now, I'm doing creepy girl shit
*shakes jar of preserved eyeballs and binges horror movies*

 

[Brianne_24]

love y'all. stay fierce.

 

[Enid]

It kinda pisses me off when people scoff at someone's express belief that personality matters more than base physical looks when seeking a sexual/romantic partner. That's just how it is for many people, myself included.

I can look at people I find visually appealing all day long and enjoy the view, I guess, but there will be absolutely no weight behind that enjoyment until I know what that person is like. I need to know their substance, can they make me laugh, are they goofy, are they kind. Does their mind work in interesting ways. Etc

The ONLY physical baseline I insist on is prolly the hygiene thing.

 

[wallyj84]

My god... What happened to my wonderful thread. It just devolved into two people arguing about nothing.

Sad.

 

[MickeyLee]

My god... What happened to my wonderful thread. It just devolved into two people arguing about nothing.

Sad.

Wally...admitted it...you're disappointed this thread fizzled out so fast

 

[wallyj84]

Wally...admitted it...you're disappointed this thread fizzled out so fast

Fizzled out? It went on for five pages!

 

[MickeyLee]

Fizzled out? It went on for five pages!

Hmm I have higher standards for a Wally thread. 10 pages minimum, 5 Mod-deleted posts, 2 warnings. If the thread is longer than 10 pages the 1 ban per 10 pages clause kicks in.

 

[Tight_N_Juicy]

My god... What happened to my wonderful thread. It just devolved into two people arguing about nothing.

Sad.

You want exactly the kind of interaction that happened on this thread.

You love starting a fire and watching it burn.

And uh, it wasn't "about nothing".

 

[wallyj84]

You want exactly the kind of interaction that happened on this thread.

You love starting a fire and watching it burn.

And uh, it wasn't "about nothing".

I wanted a discussion about the topic. Not whatever it was you two were going on about.

 

[Tight_N_Juicy]

I wanted a discussion about the topic. Not whatever it was you two were going on about.

I was not the only one going back and forth with the person who was being stubborn and insulting.

Don't pretend to be outraged. You're just upset that no one was arguing about how ugly men don't deserve sex with their tiny penises. You were waiting for someone to say "ugly men have small penises" or some other nonsense.

Don't pull my finger.

 

[wallyj84]

I was not the only one going back and forth with the person who was being stubborn and insulting.

Don't pretend to be outraged. You're just upset that no one was arguing about how ugly men don't deserve sex with their tiny penises. You were waiting for someone to say "ugly men have small penises" or some other nonsense.

Don't pull my finger.

I literally laughed out loud at that. That's honestly not what I was looking for. I wasn't thinking about penis size at all when I made this thread.

I wanted a discussion about sex with ugly men. Just that. I thought there would be a genuine difference. For example, I thought someone would say that ugly were less confident or more nervous or more attentive. But most of the women here couldn't even get themselves to say that there was an objective standard for ugly. So it really went nowhere.

I think what I learned is that women's attraction formula is more complex than men's. A man can be conventionally ugly, but if he fulfills some other criteria a woman might think he's attractive and forget.

In all honesty I should have realized that from my own personal experience. My ugly ass has gotten laid before and some women have called me "cute" even though I'm horribly deformed. lol

 

[IntoxicatingToxin]

This is a weird question for me to answer because I don't have sex with men I'm not attracted to, but I'm also attracted to a variety of men. I've had sex with lean muscular men, and I've had sex with large, obese men. So they're all attractive to me. I guess if you want to go by conventional standards, I could say that generally speaking (and not true in ever case) the overweight/traditionally unattractive men care more about my pleasure than the lean ones with 6 packs. Not always, but more often than not.

 

[Tight_N_Juicy]

This is a weird question for me to answer because I don't have sex with men I'm not attracted to, but I'm also attracted to a variety of men. I've had sex with lean muscular men, and I've had sex with large, obese men. So they're all attractive to me. I guess if you want to go by conventional standards, I could say that generally speaking (and not true in ever case) the overweight/traditionally unattractive men care more about my pleasure than the lean ones with 6 packs. Not always, but more often than not.

Wow, I haven't seen you around in ages.

Lovely to see you posting..