Question PuertoRican Lover's views!

[penkitten]

Originally posted by PuertoRican_Lover
Kitty, it's all good - let the big dogs handle this - no place for kittens!!

oh but im a firious cat with sharp claws

 

[wavejams007]

Puertoricanlover, You are one of my heroes. You deserve at least the grudging respect that you are willing to stand alone. i am with you on your standpoints, so while you may be outnumbered seemingly, you don't stand alone. It sure ain't fun to have lots of people disagreeing with you though. I was once on a yacht to the galapagos, and was the only conservative, surrounded by liberals. Man, guys like us need some strong backbones.:woo:

 

[PuertoRican_Lover]

Thanks guys for your moral (can I say this word in a seduction site?) support but universal truth and nature devour numbers!! You only need one to acknowledge the known and it will stand on it's own merit!!

 

[wavejams007]

Originally posted by PuertoRican_Lover
Thanks guys but universal truth and nature devour numbers!! You only need one to acknowledge the known and it will stand on it's own merit!!

man, are you going to lead some revolution for some thir-world country's independence? Cuz U are one huge idealist

 

[CraigMack]

Originally posted by NewMan
I'm not denying this statement.

All I am saying is - that labelling a chick a ho, because she's had 3 LTR relationships - 2 of which failed - is incorrect labelling.

According to PRL's views, if a woman fvcks someone before she is married - she is a ho.

Marrage in this day and age is not 100% (that is a whole other issue).

Marrage is a religious institution. Before the eye of God - and all of that.

Put one and one together.

I understand where your coming from now. Thank you for clarifying your point of view.

 

[NewMan]

Because you cannot call a woman out of her true nature as a woman without her performing the sex act outside of marriage because it is not the sex act that is wrong but rather how it is used! NO ONE ever calls a woman a “Hor” if she is having sex with her husband – I never heard it!!! Can you call a virgin a hor? No! A woman not performing sexual acts cannot be called a hor! So, this is why the sex act must be the main ingredient in calling a woman out of her true nature because she has acted outside of her true nature as a woman and thus it is only appropriate to call her for what she is

You use NATURAL and MARRAGE again.

You associate one with the other. Marrage is purely a religious ceremony (and a contact between a man and woman) and you call this natural.

That is as man made as a vehicle is.

You brand around the word natural and Religion in the same sentence - which is it PRL.

if they had sex with 16 men how would the man know he is the father aside from the modern day tests that were NOT available since the beginning of time - all her sex partners would deny that they fathered the child and they would flee - as they ALWAYS have - turmoil for the woman and child is the result!! This is not natural because there needs to be a loving father involved who will sacrifice himself for the benefit of HIS family.

If she had sex with them in the same day then no. And I agree she would be a ho.

But what of the woman who has had sex with 1 man who she was engaged to for 4 yrs? you would call her a ho. Why? because she had sex with a man she was destined to marry?

FOOLISH.

MARRAGE is not the NATURAL order of things.

Did the caveman marry his women? Ha - no. He took what he wanted and fvcked who he pleased. That is the NATURAL order of things.

Men rule today as we did in the caveman days.

We take women today as we took them back then - the difference being, the type of alpha male has changed.

 

[rgeere]

Originally posted by penkitten
oh but im a firious cat with sharp claws

You're also cute, fluffy, and independant ... what is your point?

 

[JonJack]

NewMan seems to be banging his head on a brick wall. I understand what you're trying to say dude. Just that I do not think that PRL is willing to address your questions.

I totaly agree that marriage is man made. In the animal kingdom, there are some animals that have life partners. It's hard to believe that they're married though. Cause I don't think they have animal priests or animal marriage laws. Stupidest thing is, these animals that bond for life do not seperate so easily unlike their human counterparts with their marriage.

It is far fetched to believe that women are supposed to only fvck the man she marries. It is also far fetched to believe that all marriages won't end in divorce. It is also far fetched to believe that these divorced women won't go and fvck another man. It doesn't matter whether she marries again or not because the fact that her first one didn't work already establishes the fact that the marital institution is flawed. "Till death do us part" only applies in the animal kingdom, not to us.

 

[NewMan]

JonJack.... Your right on.

 

[Gonzalo]

Am I the only one who's tired of PRL preaching from his balcony about "nature," when in fact the poor chap cannot tell the difference between an absolute and a relative statement?

Dude, whatever philosophy you have that makes you appear "better" in your head when comparing yourself to gays and easy women, and whatever cheap proof you offer for that, fine. Just don't say that your ideas ARE the NATURAL ORDER OF THINGS, cause that's past pretentious, it's just ridiculous.

 

[penkitten]

Originally posted by rgeere
You're also cute, fluffy, and independant ... what is your point?

there was suppose to be a point?
my bad, i was just rambling

 

[djbr]

Originally posted by PuertoRican_Lover

YES, it is the man’s nature to pursue the woman (this is known), and we have consistently followed the dictates of our nature as men – but what has changed in the most modern of times is the acquiescence of the women – the woman has the final determination to accept our wooing advances or to cast them aside in hopes for a greater affirmation of her womanhood from another man!! \Women (hors) of today have no shame and give them selves readily to all, or most, or some, or one she sees as desirable regardless of commitment or loyalty or vow!!! She (the hor – the unmarried woman) wants satisfaction of her carnal desires without consequence of the womb – but again, we cannot deny the natural law that dictates the action of the sperm and egg!!!

If a woman accepts many men and invites and acquiesces to their sexual advances then what incentive is there for a man to embrace and dedicate himself to her offspring??? She is a hor and no one special – the man views himself as the next pimp in line and the newborn child is the result of “someone else’s sperm that led to this “accidental” birth. All sane men deny being the procreator of the unmarried hor’s offspring! This is the natural and correct response!

I LOVE YOU PRL.

This is one of the BEST things I've ever read on this forum.

 

[Ebach]

PRL as well as Player_Supreme (haven't seen him around maybe because I've been gone for so long) know what they're talking about.

The rest who get no *****, good luck to you in your own little world. It's not just about getting *****, it's about existing and procreating. That's the purpose of life. When you try to objectify our nature it doesn't make much sense but nature is not objectifiable because everyone might perceive it different (even though it's the same internally).

It's a chemical reaction. It happens internally and all we perceive is the reactions. I know when I see a feminine girl my nuts start pumping crazy and my **** hardens like the **** that it is. If I try to objectify what I'm going through everything goes to ****. I just let it be and act it out.

That's it. People these days are thinking too much about the bull**** they're being fed by society. Objectifying doesn't work when it comes to nature. Nature is nature. Don't **** with it.

 

[Ebach]

I agree on the part that marriage is a ritual. It's a "label" of type of what we do naturally.

 

[So Many Ways]

Puerto Rican Lover is one of the few cats on this site who actually knows what they're talking about.

 

[PuertoRican_Lover]

Originally posted by NewMan
You use NATURAL and MARRAGE again.

You associate one with the other. Marrage is purely a religious ceremony (and a contact between a man and woman) and you call this natural.

MARRAGE is not the NATURAL order of things.

You are fanning the flames by using the word “Marriage” - as I said, marriage is merely a cultural and religious ritual to signify life-long commitment to one another; however, it IS natural for the WOMAN to be with one man as I explained in the “Natural order of things” and on this thread !! Read it again!

IT IS NATURAL FOR A MAN AND A WOMAN TO EMBRACE EACH OTHER’S COMPLIMENTARY NATURE AND BECOME ONE UNIT TO CREATE AND NOURISH A LIFE_LONG COMMITMENT TO ONE ANOTHER TO ADVANCE THEMSELVES AS A FAMILY UNIT FOR THE GOOD OF THEIR OFFSPRING AND SOCIETY!!!

Are you happy? I never used the word marriage!! YIPPPEEEEEEEEE!!!!

If you don’t personally agree with marriage then DON”T do it!! But I’ll tell you one thing, if you think you are going to be a DJ until you are 89 and a woman is going to be with you forever horing as your “girl” then you are mistaken – every woman, especially as they age, will seek a long term commitment held by marriage vows – why you ask? Because they know that time is against them and must use their youth to trap, errrr, to get a man!!

If you haven’t experienced this then either you are undesirable as a life-long mate or are dealing with hors who just want to have fun (for the moment only of course) – even hors wake up to their natural fate and want to stop horing!! They don’t stop horing because they want to or for moral obligations, rather they know that it is natural for men to seek younger prey and that she will be alone because she has been horing too long and have gone outside of her nature as a woman and has been rejected as a woman and wholeheartedly been accepted as a hor!!

Men don’t marry hors – they have sex with them!!! Except this generation has embraced the hor, and this is why marriage today is an utter failure – men are marrying hors and not marrying women – FOOLS!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It is unnatural to marry a masculine hor – a clash is inevitable and departure is the norm!!!

Don’t hate religion or marriage, these are “norms” embraced by the masses – it is not our business to go against what people believe or want to do – hate the hor who you are with and who is the aberration and has gone outside of her nature as a woman!! Masculine hors have created havoc upon the planet – don’t contribute to the chaos by embracing them!!!

I am not trying to convert you to my thinking - I'm being rational in my thinking - take religion out of it and you'll see it for what it is!

 

[PuertoRican_Lover]

Yes DJ Gigalo, this is exactly the cause of the sky-rocketing divorce rate of recent times - but men don't want to admit that their wife or the mother of their children is a hor!!! Let them be financially and emotionally devoured by this modern-day lioness -it is the man's own doing through his corrupted thinking!!!!

Weren't you Gigalo from Illinois a few years back and now have changed your name to SuperGigalo??

 

[dietzcoi]

PR_L, once again I have to ask where you were in 1983 when I made the worst mistake of my life??

To think I could be retired now and living in the South of France, instead I pay out the a$$ for child support and lose half of my military pension.

WHy don't these young bastards listen? THey have no excuse.. they have heard the truth and they won't believe it!!

Dietzcoi

 

[JonJack]

Now I'm getting confused. So PRL, all relationship problems are caused by the so called hor? Divorce, infidelity, irreconcilable differences all happen because the wife decides to become a hor or because she was a hor to begin with? Are all wives supposed to be with one man for the rest of their miserable lives? Even if it drives them insane or drives them to commit suicide?

Ultimately though, is sex really that important? Is this one act such a pivotal moment in a human being's existence? Is sex really a good reason to label someone an aberration who is meant to be hated?

Is everything to blame the fault of the hor? Cause you really do make it sound that way.

 

[djbr]

I'll say it again: PRL I LOVE YOU.

This guy is right, absolutely right.

I see girls left and right trying to keep a man using sex. But the reason why they want to keep the man with them is not for fulfilling relationships, it's much more to have a toy, someone to bring them everything they want (oh honey, why don't you do that? FOR ME, PLEASE!). Oh, PLUS the sex! (remember dudes, it's NOT a favor they're doing to us!)

I don't want that. Neither do you, or anyone that wants to be a DJ.