Member of a Harem
- Thread starter alysen6
- Start date
Well, if it was in a move set I could play it...but real thing it does not appeals to me, I dont want to be at services of no man big or small..waiting for his sexual attentions and etc...no way too restrict confine to my personality...plus when I'm horny and etc no way I would wait in the line for my date in his schedulle....
:biggrin1: Hmmm...Arabs night scenario more appealing to me is a single powerful Sheik down to earth that we meet in the desert storm and fought for our lives and learn admire each other strenghts and blablabla...mmmmmm.....
Brilliant (and libidinous) minds think alike. I think we should see what we can do about accommodating our schedules...:biggrin1:Well, if it was in a move set I could play it...but real thing it does not appeals to me, I dont want to be at services of no man big or small..waiting for his sexual attentions and etc...no way too restrict confine to my personality...plus when I'm horny and etc no way I would wait in the line for my date in his schedulle....
Maybe we should start a thread and see how many volunteers we can recruit?
Mr. Snakey
Expert Member
that a dicey idea!!!.. sure .. think of all the fun with the other harem members too... yehawwwwww
B_Hickboy
Sexy Member
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2005
- Posts
- 10,059
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 61
- Points
- 183
- Location
- That twinge in your intestines
what's to cope with. all it is is ordering a cock whore to suck your cock on command. nothing hard about that
Belly_Dancer
Experimental Member
When taking a Human Sexuality course in college, I remember reading about a certain culture in which the tradition was polygamy, only it was the woman who had multiple husbands, not the other way around.
To my mind, this is a far more practical arrangement than the typical one man, many women arrangement (be they harem girls or wives).
Many women (especially as we age) have nearly insatiable appetites, and are capable of climaxing almost without limit. We would be far better suited to pleasure multiple men than an individual man would be suited to pleasure multiple women, IMO.
So, I think Mercurialbliss, Claire, NJQT, Think_Kink, and Snoozan may have the right idea... :scratchchin:
We can wear you guys out long before you wear us out. :wink:
To my mind, this is a far more practical arrangement than the typical one man, many women arrangement (be they harem girls or wives).
Many women (especially as we age) have nearly insatiable appetites, and are capable of climaxing almost without limit. We would be far better suited to pleasure multiple men than an individual man would be suited to pleasure multiple women, IMO.
So, I think Mercurialbliss, Claire, NJQT, Think_Kink, and Snoozan may have the right idea... :scratchchin:
We can wear you guys out long before you wear us out. :wink:
- Doc,
I just love the way that women alwas think they can wear men out. I think it is really amusing, considering I remember what I was like when I was 18. I guess from a female perspective it makes sense when your sexual cycle is completely different than a mans. At 35, men just want to have a fuck and sleep, maybe even watch TV once in a while, and at 45 well the drive declines some more. Mens sexual peak after all is theoretically at 18 or so (this of course is different for every man, but it is somewhere around that area). But at 19, all we want to do is stick our cock into anything. Sofa's, soaps, watermelons, and if we are lucky, pussy.
Now I'm not sure if all the men would agree with me on the above post, but the point is, do women really remember how much they didn't care about sex when they were 17 and the guys were dying for it. No. Believe me, men can tire a woman any day. The problem is getting the right guy. One at 40, is not going to jump around like a jackrabbit all day. Where as one at 18, might wear you out so badly, you wish you had slept with someone at 40. It's a catch 22.
What I wonder sometimes, is what was natural selection thinking about when it set our sexual cycles apart with such great distances?
Now I'm not sure if all the men would agree with me on the above post, but the point is, do women really remember how much they didn't care about sex when they were 17 and the guys were dying for it. No. Believe me, men can tire a woman any day. The problem is getting the right guy. One at 40, is not going to jump around like a jackrabbit all day. Where as one at 18, might wear you out so badly, you wish you had slept with someone at 40. It's a catch 22.
What I wonder sometimes, is what was natural selection thinking about when it set our sexual cycles apart with such great distances?
I've yet to find a woman who can "wear me out." Most complain of being sore long before I feel like finishing. And most abstain from sex for several days after a long night of intercourse.
The idea of women having harems doesn't really make sense. Most women would never want a harem. Men love variety and generally have more of a sexual appetite. Therefore, powerful men with means and status tend to use their wealth as bait for women. More often than not, this results in having many women who are willing to submit to you sexually. In certain cultures and in certain periods of time powerful men didn't need to keep their "harem" discreet but enjoyed multiple wives. Most desirable men who aren't married do have a sort of invisible harem. The women are simply left in the dark.
I do find Alysen's idea of having an acknowledged full-blown "harem" quite appealing. :smile:
IOW, you're welcome to join our open-minded group, but only as long as you think like we do.
:tongue:
WRONG. Belief that harems can be for both sexes = openminded. Belief that they are meant for only one sex (see thirdlegmeat's post) = closeminded.
It's not as though he'd want to join our harem anyway. That much he made fairly obvious.
Belly_Dancer
Experimental Member
Mercurialbliss, ah, how I love thee.
I've actually fantasized about having a long-term relationship with more than one man at the same time, living in the same house. If that isn't the definition of a harem, I don't know what is.
I don't know that I'd actually like to do that, but the fact that the idea turns me on is very telling. Also, Doc's opinions on the level of sexual interest among 17-year-old girls makes it very clear that he did not associate with the right 17-year-old girls. :tongue:
Frankly, I don't give a shit how randy a 17-year-old guy is...trust me, I fucked lots of 17-year-olds when I was sixteen and seventeen, and:
** I never found a guy as horny, passionate, or sexually experienced as I was (okay one...wait...no, two). Only two guys were able to even exist in my 'zone', despite the fact that I would not reach my sexual peak for another...18 years? Whatever.
** I found the vast majority of men under the age of 21 to be severely lacking in stamina, finesse, creativity, and the ability to think beyond having their own needs met.
I'm very pleased for thirdgirdle's partners in that he is able to satisfy them so thoroughly. However, he needs to understand that his abilities are the exception, rather than the rule.
He also needs to undergo some serious reeducation about female sexuality, if he thinks none of us would want a harem. :wink: :tongue:
My Responses: :biggrin1:
1) "Only to me"
R-- No, only to evolutionary science and basic human nature.
2) "here" and "here"
R-- "Here" and here" aren't MOST women. Every once in awhile man bites dog. It's called an aberration. I'm still correct in using the term "MOST."
3) "There are still powerful women..."
R-- Men don't choose women based on their "power." The truth is men couldn't care less (again, BASIC HUMAN NATURE).
4) "Besides you couldn't join our harem..."
R-- It's the same answer I previously provided. In my opinion, it wouldn't be a harem. That's like saying a "baron pregnant lady". I wouldn't want to join a group of multiple men servicing a "powerful" woman. Most men would agree with me. The ones who don't are either:
A) Trying to kiss a** (which is pathetic).
or....
B) Brainwashed themselves by years of mentally deranged rants from Orwellianesque university professors. I am educated myself, but as a great American writer once said, "I never let my schooling interfere with my education." :tongue: Orwellian - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
BTW- Your very argument, which is entirely emotional/equality based, is actually evidence supporting the inherent differences between men and women--differences that extend beyond anatomy. People should stop valuing sensitivity more than truth. It is truly sick.
Watch that open mind--things are known to fall out sometimes. :biggrin1:
Similar threads
