Jump to content

youngish56

Registered
  • Content Count

    75
  • Joined

Community Reputation

15 Good

About youngish56

  • Rank
    Active Contributor

Personal Info

  • Relationship Status
    couple
  • Location
    Florida
  • Interests
    classic cars, fishing, travel
  • Occupation
    auto body shop
  1. Sorry folks, but I'm going to be crude here. I'm the male part of this duo and I've never seen a shlong anywhere near that small. Are we sure we're talking honestly, or are we measuring things differently perhaps ? Erect penis measured along the top from where it leaves the torso to the tip. Two and a half inches, how does this guy pee on a cold day, or how small would it be when "I was in the pool!!!" (Seinfeld) ? My wife is not an appreciator of penetration, oral is her game, but she has mentioned a negative distraction to a certain 4 and a half guy she's otherwise enjoyed. So I understand the premise of the post, just never seen one THAT small.
  2. My two cents. You make the decision to handle your relationship the way you want to do it. Pretty, ugly, right or wrong, its up to you to go with the flow, rock the boat or upset the applecart. Its your call and yours alone. You will live with the results of your actions and not anyone who gives you advice. If you are willing to put up with his professed attitude about your not leaving the lifestyle, then no one else's opinion has any value to your decision. No relationship is perfect and we all put up with problems we wish we didn't have. It's up to you alone to decide how serious this issue is. Make the best decision and good luck to you. Gary
  3. Sometimes I get the impression that about every third or fourth thread should have a repetitive, automatic injection of - "personal attacks are like the people who make them - they suck". Any site is so much more enjoyable if all the people would just refrain from personal attacks. They have no constructive value.
  4. Just an opinion from a different angle - are we swingers or are we polyamorous or are we somewhere in the middle ? Some of us enjoy sex with other people, with our spouses approval/involvement. Some of us enjoy the non-sexual personal relationship with that person or those people. Some of us form loving relationships with other people and couples. So much diversity in trying to differentiate between a separate definition for these two categories. If there is any clear difference to be "labeled", I think it would be between the "swingers" who partake in sexual practices without emotional attachment AND the swingers who insist on emotional attraction/involvement to be sexual. Does the requirement of emotional attraction make us NOT swingers ? Does it make us polyamorous ? By many's definition we are neither and both. The commonality is we are attracted to sex with other couples. Trying to categorize or label our activities as "clinically this or that" is of no importance to our real lives. Interesting topic with no real black and white answer. Thanks Lori.
  5. regularguy- I think you stepped on your dick again with the suggestion that a pretentious vocabulary is the result of education and intelligence. I believe that many feel, as I do, that an impressive vocabulary is commonly, not always, the result of the speakers fixation with impressing his listeners with his vocabulary. Nothing more. Looking forward to kicking another topic with you. Joyous Noel
  6. Regularguy- You post an interesting dichotomy of humility and arrogance. None have personally attacked you as yet. Keep up the interesting posts. Your challenges bring out interesting responses. I learned "dichotomy" in a marketing class plus 30 years ago. My other 3 or more syllable words are "deviate' and "degenerate". Please confine your future posts to one or two syllables except when using these words. haha Pere Noel.
  7. regularguy and others- I'm sure I'm not the only one to have needed dictionary assistance to even start understanding your posts. Once I understood the textbook meaning of three of the mystery words, only then could I reread your text to understand its content. Sorry to be pill - or is that a pharmaceutical capsulation.haha
  8. apologies Dan - Went back and reread your posts and now, with your guidance, I see that I did miss the point. Your point is well taken, I agree with you, and I guess we haven't had our first spat yet. A lesson learned. I dislike when others react to something I didn't say, and that is exactly what I did. Let me double my efforts now.
  9. There are frequently exaggerated resonses to any post that suggests a person's position on the race topic. I believe it has a lot to do with the anonymity of the responder and his or her personal agenda. I agree with everyone's right to be selective but the causes for preferring Caucasian are not from the same criteria as weight. In agreement with what you said, I find Mexican women mysteriously attractive, but I have no lust for sex with them, no matter their weight. "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" etc. I support your position that being selective is both normal and healthy, only wanted to suggest that a fat Mexican girl has two reasons I won't chase her. She can lose weight, the other she cannot change. Not her fault, and I'd expect she has the same prejudice toward me. Normal stuff. This site experiences an occasional occurance of personal attacks from some members. Don't be surprised if such posts follow.
  10. At the risk of being dangerously honest, Dan, I can visualize many people making both discriminations. I remember you once warned me about not going there, but I can't control myself again. In our physical preference "check list" didn't we select that ethnic group that we wanted screened for us. Those of us who did not affirmatively select "black" did, by omission, select "not black". In my opinion, our typical white lifestyle is both racist and politically correct. We claim to have no tolerance with discrimination, but we don't take advantage of those great real estate values and public schools in the ghetto.(sarcasm intended) So, the black issue is entirely different from the weight issue. To compare the two, would only be valid on the most superficial level. Gosh, sounds like we may have had our first spat. I hope it makes our "relationship" stronger.LOL
  11. Dan- I usually both agree with and admire your efforts to get readers to think and respond. On this issue I have just a minor misalignment of attitude. As I recall, you referenced the lack of appropriateness for exact physical compatibility when the goal is casual sex. I think the definition of casual sex is different for many of us and this is where the appropriateness of attitude differs. As I stated in my previous post, some of us cannot have such impersonal sex as some others claim to have. For us, physical attraction is only part of the appeal of another person or couple. So, I think its important to understand each person's definition of casual sex.
  12. My interpretation of HWP is a loose definition that describes a person as not "turn off" overweight. Although one couple described 20 lbs excess baggage as too fat to be attractive to them, it obviously is not the case with most people. As my son said to me when he was 6'2" with a 30 " waist, you are fat when your waist exceeds your trouser length. That was 15 years ago, and now he says he isn't fat, just short for his weight. Some readers claim they're able to exclude any personal compatibility requirement to their experiences. We're not like that and frankly, can't understand just that much impersonality in anyone's sex. Drifting from the topic ? HWP is a "loose" definition to people who think that personal compatibility is required to enjoy sex, as we absolutely do. HWP has a more severe definition to those who are pursuing impersonal sex(?) regardless of compatibility.
  13. Re: guess my education and earning potential.Certainly no way of knowing from your two brief sentences. But like all humans I've already gotten a "mental image" of you from the first phrase that impressed me. I'd GUESS - you're a rebel-type person who has trouble conforming to any large peer group. You would like to describe yourself as a free thinking, confident individual who doesn't need the assurances of others in feeling that your views are the correct ones. You have to have the last word and you're a heavy dope smoker. You asked an impossible question and I gave you an equally worthless answer. This has either been a waste of time or a valuable exchange of ideas. How will either of us ever know?
  14. Seems to me just another area where couples are either compatible or not. This is a consumer driven society. We all spend up to our incomes and have the experiences our incomes have afforded. If one pretentious male wants to compare the relative merits of the BMW V-12 vs the Benz V-12 and the other wants to brag about the mud-slinging ability of his Ford F-350 4WD, you have an incompatibility, largely caused by different income levels. If it weren't politically incorrect, I think it could be one of the first questions we ask when wondering about compatibility with new acquaintances. "could you please tell me the value of your assets and what brand is your wrist watch ?". Outrageous exaggeration, of course, but I hope I made my small point. Income is a very important area of compatibility.
  15. I think a certain maturity level in both couples is necessary for a friendship to be real. It is far easier for older people with grown kids and comfortable incomes. The stress on younger folks to live up to the overconsuming lifestyle they feel is necessary, carries over to a competitive discomfort and resentment between people of the same sex. Not so common across the sexes. Just my opinion, but I'm always right.
×
×
  • Create New...