A woman's reply from another forum on this topic

quote:

Originally posted by matisse

LOL... oh man.
Jesus Christ... you sound like you have some serious issues.
Actually, you sound like a paedophile: "Once in a while I see a nice,
natural girl, without tons of makeup that exudes inner and outer
beauty. Fresh pink skin, clean, plain and nicely groomed hair and
dressed neatly. No, she is not a hot babe if one judges them by
current trends, but she exhibits her 'hotness' in a way that seems to
be lost nowadays...freshness and wholesomeness." Let me guess, you
prefer women to be "brazilian waxed". The less a woman appears to be
an adult, the better for you, correct?

Males project their idealized image of how women should look then,
when they are accommodated, turn around and attack that very same
image. Maybe you should deal with your complaint that women (girls, in
you world) aren't fitting your image of how they should appear by
changing yourself. This doesn't seem to be the proper forum to air
your personal sexual fantasies. You doi realize that "girls" refers to
pre-pubescent females, that girls become women when they begin
menstruation, right?

quote:

Now, I seldom get a chance to talk with these wholesome beauties, so I
am judging them by externals. No doubt surface appearance is not
reliable, and their inner beauty may not match their outer beauty, but
at least it is a start in the right direction.

The "right" direction meaning the direction of your choice.

One would think sex addicts have plenty to work on within themselves
before complaining about others. Men who need porn to stimulate
themselves sexually have deeper problems then how women should appear.
Addiction is not being able to get enough of what you really don't
want. Maybe you should look at that too.

Incidentally, since you are also an over-eater, you might think about
referring to areas of the anatomy by their proper name instead of
using food substitutions like "cup cakes".

You remind me of the dark side of self-esteem.

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********

V writes:

Thank you for your reply matisse.

Girls? I just refer to young women as girls. Hell, I call my wife 'my
girl' once on awhile. If my use of that term is wrong, then please
excuse me. Our high schools refer to their sport teams as girls and
boys teams...but maybe we are all wrong.

I am sorry that I do not have time to reply to all the posts in this
thread, as I am very busy. But will take some time to respond to this
one and hopefully answer a few questions for all.

The point of my original post was to discuss how women nowadays are
predisposed to recreating 'the natural into the unnatural' matisse.

I make no demands women change in any way. My only demand is that I
may have freedom to live, think and to write. but this is something
you wish to deny me it seems.

You write; "This doesn't seem to be the proper forum to air your
personal sexual fantasies."

I tried to keep such personal sexual discussion to a minimum and focus
on the subject of natural girls and the defacement to their bodies.
Don't forget, the girls of today will be the women of tomorrow. We are
at a 'simple living' and 'enough' forum, so I felt it a timely topic
to bring up.

You write: "Oh Man...Jesus Christ... you sound like you have some
serious issues." .....Because I wish for a person to be at peace with
their natural state of being?

You write I "sound like a pedophile" ....Do I sound like a pedophile
matisse because I appreciate natural beauty? I appreciate it in old as
well as young. I find many women into their 60's and some beyond
beautiful.

You write "Let me guess, you (V) prefer women to be "brazilian waxed".
The less a woman appears to be an adult, the better for you,
correct?" .....re-read my OP. I wrote about natural girls, although I
am not adverse to a hair cut if hair is excessive. I like women to
look like women. These issues you mention stem from your own personal
prejudices. All problems are created in the mind. These are just such
issues that bother you but do not bother me and you have to come to
peace with them for yourself. I make no demands that anyone change...I
only comment on their actions.

You write: "One would think sex addicts have plenty to work on within
themselves before complaining about others." ... Successful
transformation in recovery requires one to look within as well as to
look outside of one's self. I learn form all...both as to success and
failures. When I see a direction that leads to failure - I do the
opposite.

You write: "Men who need porn to stimulate themselves sexually have
deeper problems then how women should appear." ... well the women must
appear in the porn first to stimulate the man. Men are visual
creatures when it comes to sex..so what. This is how nature created
men. Should the nature of man be all changed around to accord with the
will of matisse? About 95%% of the men masturbate at some time in their
life. Women masturbate as well, so do animals, it is natures way. The
only questions is if they masturbate in excess and it ends up
destroying one's peace.

Being hyped up is a byproduct of sex. One goes with the other, so no
use beating yourself up over it. The nature of the beast with sex is
to get excited, so this is what makes it tougher addiction than food
and spending, as we can eat or spend and still be devoid of most of
the excitement from these areas if we wish. But in general, we cannot
participate in sexual activity without getting excited. In addition,
it takes a day or two for some of us to go back to normal from sex, so
this refractory period is another area to deal with whenever we get
hyped up sexually. Is this refractory period bad? No, it is just how
things are. The problem with addicts is they overdo things to a point
of pain or even under penalty of death. (If you missed my earlier post
"7 benefits addictions provide us and wish a copy write me direct.)

http://www.vpul.upenn.edu/ohe/library/Sexhealth/articles/masturbating.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_sexuality

You write: "The "right" direction meaning the direction of your
choice." ...No, not my choice matisse...it is nature's choice and the
choice of finding inner peace by being at peace with who you are. If
nature is not right in the broader sense..then who is? Sure, humans
fight nature with their ego, but in the end nature always wins
matisse.

You write: "You remind me of the dark side of self-esteem." ...you are
entitled to your opinions.

But what else can you say matisse?

Of course you must use 'ad hominem' attacks on me.

I damaged you sense of self...your ego got bruised.

When we invest excessive time and energies in acquiring or building
attachments to self, these attachments become veritable extensions of
our being and come to define us for ourselves as well as define who we
are for others. When these attachments take on this role we become
susceptible to pain via these extensions.

If the person, place or thing we are attached to gets rebuked it is a
personal rebuke on us, if they get damaged or defaced so goes the
defacement and damage to our very being. The ancient Greek
philosophers knew that when passion rules the mind, that the only job
left for reason is that of the subservient task to find cleaver ways
to satisfy the passions. They called it "putting passion before
reason."

The three unwholesome roots of delusions, greed and hate are very
basic to a a Buddhist practice matisse. Out of these three, delusion
is the foundational root, for without seeing delusions for what they
are, you cannot distinguish the other two unwholesome roots of greed
and hate.

This 'delusion of self' can be seen in all the hate mail I get by
women from this post. Some women will see only what their 'self' wants
them to see and nothing more. Other women are more clear thinking in
nature and can see truth without obscuring it with their own
prejudices.

Delusional persons concentrate on personalties, whereas persons not of
this deluded nature concentrate on truths. In your post you
conveniently have skirted over the discussion I brought up and spent
your time tearing me down instead.

Women, generally do not like hearing about this subject from men. Most
women have a chip on their shoulder...or should I say a chip on their
breast concerning men.

Women have a hubby on one breast, a kid on the other breast and the
rest of the male population trying to get a piece / peace of them as
well.

So, who can blame women for carrying a grudge and being overly
sensitive in this area after everyone is trying to grab at them

If one does not go beyond self and all the attachments and prejudices,
likes and dislikes contained within that self, then one will have an
easier time getting at the true nature of things.

One time at eSangha (where I was banned) there was a discussion about
the possibility of a woman finding enlightenment. A lady recounted how
she asked her Buddhist teacher if a woman can ever reach
enlightenment. The teacher told her no. As she was perplexed, she
continued questioning the teacher until he told her that a woman
cannot reach enlightenment until she transcends the concept of being
woman.

If we look at the average woman what does she do in the morning?

She spends an hour putting on a mask to be something that she is not.

The rest of the day is spent looking in the mirror...and hating what
she sees.

Can such a person reach enlightenment? (No)

Is makeup up all that is holding her back from enlightenment? (NO)

If makeup was the only issue, men would have it made.

But we each carry our own self with us and define our lives with who
we 'think' we are via this conception of self.

Most women define self though beauty. And for men, they define life
and self for the most part trough their penis.

For enlightenment and inner peace one must seek self without self.

But as they say, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. If women like
to disfigure their bodies in search of beauty to be something they are
not...that is their right.

I only ask matisse that I may enjoy and appreciate this same freedom
or right at looking for naturalness in all things...including women.

You write: "Males project their idealized image of how women should
look then, when they are accommodated, turn around and attack that
very same image." ....I never said that at all. When did I say I like
women to have their nipples and genitals pierced with metal, have
their tongues and faced covered with rings and studs. Deformed breasts
and lips with silicone, inked up bodies, deformed feet with unnatural
shoes?...this is all up to the women to decide as choices for
themselves. To me it is ugly, not beauty ... don't put words in my
mouth, take responsibility for your own actions matisse.

A lot of the women I see seem to be like animals caught in trap,
squirming and writhing in every direction, looking, grasping outside
of themselves for freedom from this trap to find a modicum of inner
peace.

But the trap is an 'inner one' and all their efforts grasping outside
of themselves are futile.

Always remember, passions are rooted in the self and the self is
always is in flux which accounts for the rise and fall of these
passions.

Whereas, truth is stable - for the truth is that which does not
change.

The truth is: we are all born natural and what we do to this nature is
how we recreate ourselves matisse.

Also see my earlier discussion of this 'nature' topic:

http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=342.0

Take care,

V (Male)

Agnostic Freethinker
Practical Philosopher
AA#2