Would you care if your girlfriend was posing nude for money?

[Logan's Runt]

Men don't have the right to demand sexual fidelity from women?

I think the term 'right to demand' gets at the point. Men and women have no right to demand anything from one another. They can lay out their terms for a relationship, what's tolerable and what's not, and if those are not met, end the relationship. Control has no place. If a girl doesn't want to conform to a 'sexual fidelity' standard, she shouldn't have to, but she shouldn't be surprised if most men leave because of it. You've got to find a partner who has compatible views on issues such as that.

 

[Honey Vibe]

I think the term 'right to demand' gets at the point. Men and women have no right to demand anything from one another. They can lay out their terms for a relationship, what's tolerable and what's not, and if those are not met, end the relationship. Control has no place. If a girl doesn't want to conform to a 'sexual fidelity' standard, she shouldn't have to, but she shouldn't be surprised if most men leave because of it. You've got to find a partner who has compatible views on issues such as that.

At first I replaced the word "demand" with "ask", but I changed it back to "demand". I did this because there are threads of fidelity to himself on the line. It's humiliating to those who go into a relationship for comfort, love and understanding -- that is, real commitment -- to realize those personal moments were unauthentic. Like a teenager manipulating her parents, any protest is thrown back in his face as "primitiveness" "controlling", etc.

Your word choice showcases a lot of your thoughts about men. "Lay out terms", whether they are "met", "conformity", "standards", "compatibility". They seem like contractors to your real ambitions, and nothing like emotional beings.

The thing about committed relationships is, you're now looking out for the interests of someone other than yourself. True commitment touches on depths of openness, vulnerability, and fusion with another that many like yourself can never feel entirely comfortable with. If you don't want to "commit", as you said and I agree, that's fine and no one should make you. However, your interpretation of that "demand" as "control" has a lot more to do with your own deep-set fears, than saying no to chauvinism.

 

[Logan's Runt]

Your word choice showcases a lot of your thoughts about men. "Lay out terms", whether they are "met", "conformity", "standards", "compatibility". They seem like contractors to your real ambitions, and nothing like emotional beings.

The thing about committed relationships is, you're now looking out for the interests of someone other than yourself. True commitment touches on depths of openness, vulnerability, and fusion with another that many like yourself can never feel entirely comfortable with. If you don't want to "commit", as you said and I agree, that's fine and no one should make you. However, your interpretation of that "demand" as "control" has a lot more to do with your own deep-set fears, than saying no to chauvinism.

You seem to be making quite a few assumptions about me here. Being an emotional being doesn't mean that you can't evaluate a relationship with an eye for logic. If a girl wants to live her life in a certain way that whatever boyfriend she's with disagrees with fundamentally, its time to move on. If two people have different values, those values shouldn't need to be compromised on either side.

I take offense that you make the judgement that I can never feel entirely comfortable with 'true committment.' What makes you think I was talking about myself necessarily? I was talking about myself when I said I was a nude model, etc. The bit about 'a girl' was an ideology about the way relationships could work or not. I do happen to conform to a sexual fidelity standard that both my partner and I agree fully upon. The fact that I believe that relationships and love can be as varied as the people in them doesn't mean that my personal relationship is 'not standard' in any way at all.

I don't understand how real committment as you define it is not possible if the girl is a nude model. If that guy doesn't feel that real committment is being given to him by a girl that is a nude model, then he shouldn't be with a nude model. He should date a girl who feels similarly. I'm not saying in any way that he should change himself or his values. But to make a generalization that the only way to have a true committed relationship can never include nude modeling or other non-standard life choices is rediculous and small minded.

What I was saying in my last post was that neither partner in a relationship should be required to comprimise their beliefs and values in order to please the other-- meet their 'demands.' If a value of one person is intolerable to the other (as in, after discussion no middle ground can be reached), the relationship should end. Simple. Your need to bring assumptions about me personally into the discussion is petty.

 

[Movies205]

To interject a male point of view... This idea of property, demands, etc only work if the other benefits from those same ideals. For example, if the woman I'm dating belongs to me then I should belong to her, whatever wierd notions spring from such a system I do not know, I don't think a person can be someone else property. I think that in a relationship, either person has the right to make demands, sacrifices must be made or else it simply two people occupying the same space, nothing binding, and just as easily as that person walked in that person can walk out, there needs to be some feeling of needing to sacrifce or fight for. On the same tolken I agree with LogansRunt, one should never compromise one's fundamental ideals for someone else and at that point it's time to call it quits. Also I don't believe there's any right way to how one lives there life, posing nude is not evil, it really just depends on one's value set. I was simply curious how people valued their girlfriend's posing nude, the reason teh question is so gendered is a good portion of the forum is male so I was curious what hte male prospective was. As to whether I would care or not, I do not know... Part of me wouldn't care because it would be her body but the other side of me knows I'd probably be dating a woman with intelligence and was skilled in something, and I'd rather she were using her talents to that field instead of selling pictures of herself... But ultimately it would be her decision.

 

[Logan's Runt]

T I'd probably be dating a woman with intelligence and was skilled in something, and I'd rather she were using her talents to that field instead of selling pictures of herself... But ultimately it would be her decision.

Not attacking/disagreeing with you by any means, but a girl can't really make a living at the nudie interweb business, at least on the site I'm a part of (the time between being paid for a set and being able to submit another can be a year or more). Most of the girls on there are very talented and intelligent and do use those qualities for their careers. Its a nice hobby for most, something to participate in on the side and make a bit of cash too. The site is quite the community as well, and a lot of people come for the naked and stay for the community.

I just thought I'd explain a bit since not everyone knows a whole lot about how this kind of thing works.

 

[terry78]

If you have to ask for your partner's permission for them to be monagamous to you alone, that's a red flag right there. Sometimes you just have to stand up and make some choices, damn the equal partnership stuff. Some of them actually appreciate your taking charge moreso than asking about every little miniscule thing.

 

[jaguarr]

jag

 

[terry78]

^Nothing is more tantalizing than a white and asian chick catfight. It just isn't.

 

[jaguarr]

Well, the one on the bottom may not be Asian. To be fair, she's squinting her eyes and that other girl's pulling her hair back pretty far.

jag

 

[Logan's Runt]

Hah, that's great!

 

[terry78]

Well, the one on the bottom may not be Asian. To be fair, she's squinting her eyes and that other girl's pulling her hair back pretty far.

jag

Yeah, that is a tad racist now that i think about it if that is the case.

 

[Honey Vibe]

What I was saying in my last post was that neither partner in a relationship should be required to comprimise their beliefs and values in order to please the other-- meet their 'demands.'

This is not the statement you made in your last post. You said, and I quote, "Men and women have no right to demand anything from one another", in the context of sexual fidelity. What this sounded like, to my mind, is that a man does not even have the right to express his "beliefs and values", without being put down as "controlling".

My own life is not committed to any standard, and I would be a hypocrite to not afford you the same right. I believe in a whole spectrum of human experience, and seeing through lenses of "right" and "wrong" are often excuses for intolerance. My point, however, was that affording people no right to demand sexual fidelity, is obtuse. Of course they have that right. If it's not for you, you should leave, without any remarks about the other being "controlling" (wrong).

Really I think we're on the same page, and talking about two sets of rights that exist in paradox.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

Would you care if I posed nude for money, Honey Vibe?

 

[jaguarr]

Really I think we're on the same page, and talking about two sets of rights that exist in paradox.

*wheels away kiddy pool full of tapioca*


jag

 

[Honey Vibe]

Would you care if I posed nude for money, Honey Vibe?

You can do whatever you want, sugar nipples!

 

[jaguarr]

Would you care if I posed nude for money, Honey Vibe?

You better hope she says "no" because it's too late to undo it all, now.

jag

 

[Logan's Runt]

This is not the statement you made in your last post. You said, and I quote, "Men and women have no right to demand anything from one another", in the context of sexual fidelity. What this sounded like, to my mind, is that a man does not even have the right to express his "beliefs and values", without being put down as "controlling".

My own life is not committed to any standard, and I would be a hypocrite to not afford you the same right. I believe in a whole spectrum of human experience, and seeing through lenses of "right" and "wrong" are often excuses for intolerance. My point, however, was that affording people no right to demand sexual fidelity, is obtuse. Of course they have that right. If it's not for you, you should leave, without any remarks about the other being "controlling" (wrong).

Really I think we're on the same page, and talking about two sets of rights that exist in paradox.

I think so as well. While I'm saying a person has the right not to be controlled by having something demanded of them, you're saying that someone has the right to uphold their personal beliefs. Really its the same thing, I just have issues with the word 'demand' as I see it as a victimizing term. But you're seeing the person doing the demanding as the one possibly victimized, and I can see that. In short, neither side should feel pushed into ideals they don't agree with and have the right to assert themselves accordingly.

I wasn't trying to say that partners can't assert their beliefs because that's a controlling action, I was taking the word 'demand' to indicate a partner unfairly forcing their beliefs on the other. I apologize that it sounded that way. The way you seem to be using the term is as an assertion of a fundamental value to a given person, which I have no problem with. Its when values are imposed on others (in this case 'you can't pose nude' rather than 'i can't be in a relationship with someone who poses nude'). I think this just comes down to a different use of the term 'demand.'

 

[Excel]

it didnt bother my girlfriend when i did it...

 

[~†~§iX~†~]

My fiancee has modelled before in various states of undress for fetish photography. The pictures have been published in a book by the photographer, and have appeared in Bizarre magazine and online. I am pretty easy going about that whole thing. I have always said that if she wanted to return to modelling then I wouldn't mind, as long as she wasn't used and abused by the photographer. It's a little weird from some point of views, but I believe it would be no problem for me as long as it wasn't pornography, because I can be the jealous type!......

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

The pictures have been published in a book by the photographer, and have appeared in Bizarre magazine.

Dude! That's one of my favorite magazines. I have them all the way back to the 90's.
Which issue/s?
I'll tell you if she's hot or not!

 

[jaguarr]

Dude! That's one of my favorite magazines. I have them all the way back to the 90's.
Which issue/s?
I'll tell you if she's hot or not!

Yeah, my wife actually has several back issues of it as well. Very nice.

jag

 

[Honey Vibe]

Dude! That's one of my favorite magazines. I have them all the way back to the 90's.
Which issue/s?
I'll tell you if she's hot or not!

WTF teh lol t:

 

[~†~§iX~†~]

Dude! That's one of my favorite magazines. I have them all the way back to the 90's.
Which issue/s?
I'll tell you if she's hot or not!

Well, I can't remember exactly which issue. It must have been somewhere between 5 and 6 years ago. If it helps, she has helium balloons on ribbon tied to her nipple rings!......

 

[Honey Vibe]

Well, I can't remember exactly which issue. It must have been somewhere between 5 and 6 years ago. If it helps, she has helium balloons on ribbon tied to her nipple rings!......

[Not Jake] Quick, Wilhelm -- to the erection cave!! [/Not Jake]