^^Pete Edochie wannabe

Well, she deserves to be thrown in jail. If not for killing her husband but for her catastrophic fashion sense; what in Sango's name does she have on? Ridiculous!

kaboninc:

Really?

Yes, really.

@op: How long did he date his ex (months/years)?

Do you realize that his ex is forever going to be in your life if you marry this man?







Can you guys stop blaming age for the op's malformed views and moronic opinions. Age has nothing to do with it, we all know there are great number of people above age 40 that are naive and stupid. Y'all are ageists.

This is such a funny thread, I'm dying!

Shy takes NL too seriously. Spend time with your families. Merry Christmas y'all!

SirShymex:
Dayuum! Now I'm scared, kanwulia the Texas orchard lol.

How long have you been married for? And have you got kids? You might as well make ya daughter ya best friend. That is my plan with my unborn little man. All my Uncles raised their sons like their close buddies, and they do everything with them. So any time they're at home, they just jam with their sons and they basically do everything together. That right there negates boredom, and whatever is wrong with their spouses.

But shiit, if the se.x is great and feels new all the time - that can go along way in curing all kinds of boredom, ya dig lool.

Is there a reason why your daughter can't be your best friend?

Chillisauce:


You try read the thing sef. And thanks for nice summary. Saves one a lot of head aches.

Op, said we crawl out from somewhere, for someone hanging on pent house, how côme she didn't know the article is old?

Abi na teleportation on work here

This particular article about PIV came up Dec last year, that is not old for something that is still being discussed on feminists blog.

I came about the article this summer on reddit and I had fun reading the comments on there.

A friend and I were talking about this article last night and I wondered if opinions on NL might be different. I don't understand how anything about my original post suggest "shady" dealings.

mutter:


Loads of women out there that have alot more self esteem than any of us are sharing their husbands. You can rebel all you like it wouldn`t change the reality.
Better save your energy for making sure you don`t get into that situation.

Besides I wonder why so many women bark at polygamy. Is it not the same women comming in as second and third wife. How can a man marry a second wife if no woman agrees to marry him? Many of these second wife`s are pretty emancipated

You never answered my earlier question on this thread. I really would like to know your answer.

eerrm....this view is definitely neither old nor tired.

If you have nothing intelligible to say about this article and this radical feminist POV, kindly go back to where you crawled out from.

Just to recall a basic fact: Intercourse/PIV is always rape, plain and simple.

This is a developed recap from what I’ve been saying in various comments here and there in the last two years or so. as a radfem I’ve always said PIV is rape and I remember being disappointed to discover that so few radical feminists stated it clearly. How can you possibly see it otherwise? Intercourse is the very means through which men oppress us, from which we are not allowed to escape, yet some instances of or PIV and intercourse may be chosen and free? That makes no sense at all.

First, well intercourse is NEVER sex for women. Only men experience rape as sexual and define it as such. Sex for men is the unilateral penetration of their penis into a woman (or anything else replacing and symbolizing the womanliness) whether she thinks she wants it or not – which is the definition of rape: that he will to do it anyway and that he uses her and treats her as a receptacle, in all circumstances – it makes no difference to him experiencing it as sexual. That is, at the very least, men use women as useful objects and instruments for penetration, and women are dehumanized by this act. It is an act of violence.

As FCM pointed out some time ago, intercourse is inherently harmful to women and intentionally so, because it causes pregnancy in women. The purpose of men enforcing intercourse regularly (as in, more than once a month) onto women is because it’s the surest way to cause pregnancy and force childbearing against our will, and thereby gain control over our reproductive powers. There is no way to eliminate the pregnancy risk entirely off PIV and the mitigating and harm-reduction practices such as contraception and abortion are inherently harmful, too. Reproductive harms of PIV range from pregnancy to abortion, having to take invasive, or toxic contraception, giving birth, forced child bearing and rearing and all the complications that go with them which may lead up to severe physical and emotional damage, disability, destitution, illness, or death (See factcheckme. for her work on the reproductive harms of PIV, click on the “intercourse series” page or “PIV” in the search bar). If we compare this to even the crappiest online definition of violence: “behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something”. Bingo. It fits: Pregnancy = may hurt, damage or kill. Intercourse = a man using his physical force to penetrate a woman. Intention / purpose of the act of intercourse = to cause pregnancy. PIV is therefore intentional harm / violence. Intentional sexual harm of a man against a woman through penile penetration = RAPE.

If we look at the act in more detail (skip this parag if you can’t take it), PIV is a man mounting on a woman to thrust a large member of himself into her most intimate parts, often forcing her to be entirely naked, banging himself against her with the whole weight of his body and hips, shaking her like he would stuff a corpse, then using her insides as a receptacle for his penile dejection. How is this a normal civilised, respectful way to treat anyone? Sorry for the explicit picture, but this is what it is and it’s absolutely revolting and violating.

The term “fVck you” is not an insult for nothing, men know why – it’s the worst thing you can do to a human being. It is in itself an extremely physically invasive act, very often painful, generally at the beginning before the pain may be cut off by the genital arousal; causes all sorts of tears, bruises, swelling, discomfort, STDs, vaginal infections, urinary infections, genital warts, HIV and death. Not to forget the additional sado-gynecological interventions/ costs of PIV-maintenance, and all the secondary physical mutilation and financial costs that go with our duty to make ourselves look decorative for male sexual consumption – such as hair removal, make-up, starvation or forced feeding, torturous limb deforming or cutting up, etc.

The fact intercourse causes so many infections and tears and warts attests to the unnaturalness of intercourse, that it’s not meant to be. The vagina’s primary function isn’t to be penetrated by a penis but to eject a baby for birth. They are two muscle tissues / sphincters pressed against each other to help the baby be pushed out. Penetration of the penis into the vagina is completely unnecessary for conception.

There’s a reason men need to groom us into it, and why this grooming takes so long- because it’s so grossly violating and traumatising that we would otherwise never submit to intercourse. The only reason we may now not feel raped or have the impression we desired or initiated PIV, is because men broke down our barriers very skillfully and progressively from birth, breaking down our natural defences to pain and invasion, our confidence in our own perceptions and sensations of fear and disgust that tell us male sexual invasion is painful, harmful and traumatic.

Through an all-pervasive and powerful male propaganda, they stuff our minds from infancy with the idea that PIV is normal, desirable and erotic, before we can even conceive of it as something horrifying, and make sure we never see any alternative to their lie – or that if we do, we can no longer take in the information, are punished for thinking and saying otherwise. The fact we may not immediately feel raped doesn’t mean it’s not rape, objectively speaking. To give a classic example, many women in prostitution may not identify the act of prostitution as rape, except if the act wasn’t paid for. It doesn’t stop us from saying that all prostitution is rape. We know that our subjective feelings or thoughts may be colonised by men’s perspectives and as radical feminists we don’t let that override and erase the objective reality of violence. (PS -The reason why ONLY the lack of payment is defined as rape is because the offence here isn’t against the prostituted woman but the love-vendor who was deprived of his income. Rape comes from rapt, which is an old word for theft of woman-as-property.)

Lastly, from a structural point of view, as a class oppressed by men, we are not in any position of freedom to negotiate what men do to us collectively and individually within the heterocage. Men, by whom we are possessed, colonised and held captive, are the sole agents and organisers of PIV. Men dominate us precisely so we can’t opt out of sexual abuse by them; intercourse is the very means through which men subordinate us, the very purpose of their domination, to control human reproduction.

http://witchwind./2013/12/15/piv-is-always-rape-ok/

What's not to like? Just let her know before-hand.

Sagamite:


This dimwit does not even understand that simple explanation.

One can reassure him or herself. Look it up.

Alephilomath:

You were talking to yourself, weren't you?

Sagamite:


Logical to a fuuktard like you.

For the record, a second party does "reassurance", not the subject.

You were talking to yourself, weren't you?

mutter:


So in other words the predominant view of the young ladies here is that a woman that is financially independent can afford to leave her husband.

In order words the main substance of a marriage is financial and once you are financially independent marriage no longer has much meaning?

Have you ever considered that a woman may just love her husband so much that she would be prepared to tolerate a second wife just so that she can still be with the man she loves.
I know so many women women who remain in the marriage because the love their husbands and would feel empty without him.

You make sense.

Your third sentence: do that also apply to the male gender??

One was trying to have a logical debate, the other was busy creaming, "I am God; I am heaven; I am intelligent; I am hell"

Why does anyone need that much reassurance??