More fodder for virgins

[juio99]

The comments on my posting below were nothing short of mind boggling.  I will respost here for clarity.  This one one of 7 or 8 paragraphs from my post.

"But I can verify that the Russian guys still come out on the short end of the stick when it comes to pleasing the ladies in a sexual sense. Every single lady that I had romance with mentioned that the Russian guys never took the care that I did to ensure that the experience was highly pleasureable for them. Some were so shocked by my words about this issue (telling them that I would insure their pleasure one way or another) that they almost resisted getting started. They just didn't know what to make of my statements and didn't know how they should react."

Now if anyone can tell me how the words in that post led to all of the things that were attributed to me and my intentions in the below posts, it would be interesting.

Just to clarify a little.  I do not have a large d1ck and do not claim to have one.  I do not claim to be a great lover.  Actually all that I do is just try my hardest to ensure that the lady enjoys the act to the fullest.  This can be accomplished with several instruments available to we men.  Women can have mutliples while most men cannot.  And women can have sex much more frequently than men.  I merely told the ladies that I would provide them with as much pleasure as they desired to have, although the methods would have to vary.

What I was trying to point out in my first post was that the ladies were surprised when I let it be known that their enjoyment would take precedence over my enjoyment and their enjoyment would come first.  This was a complete shock to them and they did not know what to make of it.  They indicated they were actually confortable with the Russian system which meant they would try to please the man and hope that they got a little something out of it.  Initially they are a little apprehensive with an approach that says, 'you first.'  But it doesn't take them long to get used to my system.

Many said such words as, "Russian men do not give any attention to our needs."  One lady told me that in 13 years of marriage, that about 95 percent of the time, she had to go into the bathroom to 'finish off by hand' after the husband was snoring.

Have at it.  :-))

JR

[BarryM]

... in response to More fodder for virgins, posted by juio99 on Oct 13, 2002

Where are you going to draw the line? Sure, sex is a topic for discussion, but I really don't think it's appropriate in this detail here. Is twat twiddling and pre-coital feminine hygene the limit? I think this discussion is going down a road that is in very poor taste for this PUBLIC forum.

First of all, it is a MAJOR mistake to post any information about personal sexual encounters. Think about it. A few board members have in the past and for some of them, it comes back to haunt them by the hostile denizens here that seek to personally attack and defame these individuals. By your continuation of the subject, it appears that your ego is stubbornly overwhelming your common sense... if you have any.

So where is this going to lead? Is it time to start naming names? Maybe it's time to compare notes. Let's find out who slept with who. How many guys on here slept with MarkInTX's fiancee before the both of them got together? How many guys slept with which girls on "Scanna", "A Pretty Woman", or "Firstdream"? Is is time to get out the scorecards and go down the list? Do we really want to know? Do we really want to go there?

Some of this forums' members are stating that they are more open-minded on the subject, but what is the limit to tolerance? For example, it is certainly immoral to beat up queers, but should tolerance extend to allowing homosexuals to teach the joys of anal "fisting" and that homosexuality is a superior lifestyle choice to our teenage children in public schools? The homosexuals argue that preventing them from recruiting our children is intolerant and bigoted. So on this forum, how far should the subject of sexuality go? Should we discuss the best places in Russian or Ukraine to find quality prostitutes? Don't we have to be open-minded about all of the sexual preferences on the board? What about RW/UW and swinging, swapping, voyerism, exhibitionism, BSDM, CBT, "water sports", scat, scarification, body modification, "medical play", latex, leather, and role playing? Do we really want to know how much RW/UW enjoys your "Prince Albert"? Do we want to discuss the ways an AM can get his Russian boyfriend to  successfully immigrate?

The subject of "Mail Order Brides" is a tarnished one is the eyes of most of the public and the INS. I spoke to some individuals who work for the INS and unanimously they associate Russian immigration with "Mail Order Bride" scams and prostitutes. They said scams and visa fraud; not the happy marital relationships discussed here. This forum needs to maintain an image of modesty and decency for posterity. If not, then the whole subject becomes one of sleaze and will only attract sleazeballs. There may be forum participants who engage in a more kinky sexual lifestyle, but it should be kept private. This board is not as anonymous as one would think. Enough personal information is eventually posted here that with some effort, a determined individual could obtain the identity of anyone here. It's foolish to display your private affairs in public. It's time to clean it up and get back to modesty.

-blm

[robobond]

... in response to What about modesty?, posted by BarryM on Oct 14, 2002

n/t

[joe]

... in response to More fodder for virgins, posted by juio99 on Oct 13, 2002

If you would like a big D**k, you can borrow mine! I have about wore it out!
Joe

hahahhaha

[Bobby Orr]

... in response to More fodder for virgins, posted by juio99 on Oct 13, 2002

For what it is worth, your description seems as clean as the subject can be.  I have no problem with your thoughts on the subject.  This is not a church choir board.

[robobond]

... in response to More fodder for virgins, posted by juio99 on Oct 13, 2002

Man, I'm getting tired of listening to your disertations on on your dickmanship.  You obviously didn't get the message from everyone after your original post.  And it's not the subject matter, it's your arrogance, attitude, and style of delivery that eveyone's gagging on.  Give it a rest.

[Jack]

... in response to Re: More fodder for virgins, posted by robobond on Oct 13, 2002

Oppps, you forgot Bob, not everyone. The president of the Dickhead Birgade agrees with juio99 writings!

[MarkInTx]

... in response to (*/*), posted by Jack on Oct 14, 2002


Thanks Jack!

I needed a good dose of irony today.

Being called a dickhead by you is like being called fat by Rosie O'Donnell.

Or... stupid by Dan, come to think of it...

Like I said, I LOVE irony! Thanks!

[MarkInTx]

... in response to Thanks Jack!, posted by MarkInTx on Oct 14, 2002

You know, I thought it was a bit odd when theSearch started using his /\ moniker. But, I guess it does make it easier to spot his messages because of his "signature."

And, I want to commend you on your fine choice! An excellent moniker!

(You DID mean for it to look like a couple of boobs, didn't you?)

I think it fits you... I really do! Good job! Let's me know what the post is about before I even start to read it!

[Jack]

... in response to P.S. -- about the new "moniker"..., posted by MarkInTx on Oct 14, 2002

as eye nyet nearly as ntelegent as U, 4 u eye wil1 xplain.

As you are looking at the subject item head-n, the left parenthesis is the right side of the face. The left asterisk is the right eye, the forward backslash is the nose, the right asterisk is the left eye and the right parenthesis is the left side of the face.

[BarryM]

... in response to (*/*), posted by Jack on Oct 14, 2002

[This message has been edited by BarryM]

1. ( @)( @)
2. ( . )( . )
3. ( - )( - )
4. (*)(*)
5. {{
6. (,)(,)
7. (')(')
8. ( # )( # )
9. (~)(~)
10. OO

These internet "chat" symbols have been around since the early days of Compuserve.

Can you guess what this one is?  | \%/ |

-blm

[JR]

... in response to Breasts ... internet chat symbols, for t..., posted by BarryM on Oct 14, 2002

.

[BarryM]

... in response to no idea on #5....my guess on other is &q..., posted by JR on Oct 14, 2002

nt

[joe]

... in response to (*/*), posted by Jack on Oct 14, 2002

nt

[JR]

... in response to P.S. -- about the new "moniker"..., posted by MarkInTx on Oct 14, 2002

I was thinking it looks like a butt )