Was with some friends last night and we got onto the subject of safe sex.

This was after - for what reason I don't know how exactly this came about - but one of the lads went into his wallet for something and was spotted with a rather impressive collection of condoms.

Now the first reaction out of the nearest girls mouth was "oh aren't you being a little optimistic" closely followed by "what are you some kind of gigolo". Perhaps a normal line of conversation in friendly company but it got us talking about gender roles in sex and how they are viewed and judged on certain things or actions.

So....what I wanted to know from you guys was what your instant reaction would be to seeing a guys wallet with such an impressive collection. What conclusion would you jump to about them? Would that conclusion be different if you were on your first date with them, or seeing a stranger in the supermarket?

Would you think them a slapper? Or be impressed for being so responsible?


Moon

First word to come into my mind is 'desperate'.

Followed shortly after with 'least likely to'. Prepared? Maybe - and in today's morally bankrupt society that's no bad thing.

But the fact the 'guy' (boy?) wasn't hiding his 'collection' says it all.

It's probably a bit of a front and the lad's never had a ride in his life.

I think being prepared is quite responsible, but showing people is a bit sad. Anyway, the ladies should be carrying a supply of condoms too, it's not just the guys responsibility.

Originally posted by nick2
I think being prepared is quite responsible, but showing people is a bit sad. Anyway, the ladies should be carrying a supply of condoms too, it's not just the guys responsibility.

Seconded.

I wouldnt judge him for carrying condoms, as it proves he is safe.

What an odd reaction Ousetunes........not so much your observation about moral bankruptcy, but your "never had a ride in his life" remark. Why would he need to "hide his collection" as if it was something appallingly shameful especially if he's with friends? Ok, so if he's flashing 'em round in a "I'm great, me , i've got dobbers" type of fashion then he's a bit of a berk, but doesn't sound like that here. You sound almost bitter about it.
At least the guy - morally bankrupt or not - has got some degree of responsibility about him. The idea of my daughter becoming sexually active ( a long way off yet thank goodness) is a bit grim, but when it does happen I'd rather it was with a guy who respects her enough to be sensible and take precautions against pregnancy / STD's than some jackass who'll give it no thought at all.

Perhaps it's just my Conservative tradition but does anybody else find the thought of carrying condoms around presumably in the hope of [to coin a phrase the young ones are using] 'getting some' a little crass in itself?

Now I'm not a prude by any stretch of the imagination but carrying condoms around all seems a bit lewd to me.

Err, no. No impoliteness intended, Jon J but how old are you? are you fortunate enough to be in a settled happy relationship?
remember being young and full of, err, passion?

Originally posted by JonJParr
Perhaps it's just my Conservative tradition but does anybody else find the thought of carrying condoms around presumably in the hope of [to coin a phrase the young ones are using] 'getting some' a little crass in itself?

Now I'm not a prude by any stretch of the imagination but carrying condoms around all seems a bit lewd to me.

I carry condoms not in the (vein) hope that i will "get lucky" but rather "just in case" i do...i dont carry them thinking "if i flash them round someone will sleep with me" its rather a "id rather not get caught short" so to speak.

Originally posted by Halibut
What an odd reaction Ousetunes........not so much your observation about moral bankruptcy, but your "never had a ride in his life" remark. Why would he need to "hide his collection" as if it was something appallingly shameful especially if he's with friends? Ok, so if he's flashing 'em round in a "I'm great, me , i've got dobbers" type of fashion then he's a bit of a berk, but doesn't sound like that here. You sound almost bitter about it.
At least the guy - morally bankrupt or not - has got some degree of responsibility about him. The idea of my daughter becoming sexually active ( a long way off yet thank goodness) is a bit grim, but when it does happen I'd rather it was with a guy who respects her enough to be sensible and take precautions against pregnancy / STD's than some jackass who'll give it no thought at all.


Maybe I'm a bit old fashioned or just too taken-in by what I see and read in the news. My 'bitterness' stems from the fact that countless youngsters seem to deem it perfectly acceptable to 'put it about' and damn the consequences.

Granted, having protection may reduce the chances of an unwanted pregnancy but whatever happened to waiting till you found the right person, instead of rushing into sex with a complete stranger? The youth of today want to be 'adult' and grown up but don't want to face the consequences which is usually left to the tax payer as per. We all know an unwanted child is a sure fire way to get on the property ladder.

If you think I'm being harsh then look around you.

No wonder so many youngsters are always so bloody bored. They've done everything there is to do by the time they're 14 things that once used to be part of one's adult - and dare I say it - married life.

I am fond of my childhood because I was a child in it doing things kids used to do. Then again, I never had to rely on the state to get me out of **** creek.

Originally posted by Halibut
Err, no. No impoliteness intended, Jon J but how old are you? are you fortunate enough to be in a settled happy relationship?
remember being young and full of, err, passion?

No offence taken Halibut. As you say I am settled in a very happy relationship but even when I wasn't I can't ever remember a single occasion where I even considered carrying around condoms. One should not make the mistake of bundling looser morals with youthful vigour. I'm not old, I'm a gentleman.

Fair play to you Ousetunes, you make some reasonable points there...I suspect you are older than I am, but your comments about childhood carry a ring of truth about them.....kids do seem to grow up way too fast today and I guess society as whole needs to bear the responsibility for that, it's a shame.

I don't think it has anything to do with your age as to how you 'view' this particular situation.
The lad in question was 22 but wasnt the youngest there. He seemed quite embarrassed by it all and was put on the defensive immediately. He wasn't flashing it about...but I do get your point.

Moon

but whatever happened to waiting till you found the right person, instead of rushing into sex with a complete stranger? He's got a point hasn't he?

Originally posted by Ousetunes
whatever happened to waiting till you found the right person, instead of rushing into sex with a complete stranger?

I don't want to sound like a tart but, playing the field is how you find the right person (from a sex point of view), it's how you find out what you like and what other people like, it's an experimental process. How can you know what you like unless you've tried everything ?

Provided everyone is consenting and every safety precaution is taken I don't see the problem.

You might think you've found the perfect person, get married and then find out she's into S&M and dressing-up in diving gear, but your not, by then it's too late, your married.

I'm not so sure that's true Nick. Look at the older generations of society [70+]; never was there an issue with the 'compatibility' factor of sex. Love was love - not sex. In my opinion, playing the field [what I assume you mean is sexual experimentation] was and is to me unnecessary. I got together with my partner because I love her, we're good together, we can laugh, we can sit in a room without speaking and enjoy each other's company. Sex is a wonderful *addition to our relationship but I never worried about whether we would be compatible because I knew the foundations of the relationship were right.

Originally posted by nick2
I don't want to sound like a tart but, playing the field is how you find the right person (from a sex point of view), it's how you find out what you like and what other people like, it's an experimental process. How can you know what you like unless you've tried everything ?

Provided everyone is consenting and every safety precaution is taken I don't see the problem.

You might think you've found the perfect person, get married and then find out she's into S&M and dressing-up in diving gear, but your not, by then it's too late, your married.

Spot on Nick. People these days (unfortunately) get judged on their sexual relationships. I know someone who constantly gets bullied and picked on because he's a virgin.

JonJParr. What you have just said is completely irrelevant as this is your own personal point of view. Granted, some people will share this point of view (mainly of the same generation). The fact of the matter is, like Nick said, the world we live in today is a whole lot different to what it used to be, and people are generally respected more for having a bit of experience.

Originally posted by JonJParr
I'm not so sure that's true Nick. Look at the older generations of society [70+]; never was there an issue with the 'compatibility' factor of sex.

People didn't even talk about sex then, women were expected to produce children and stay at home, no-one even cared what they wanted in bed. I'm sure men still slept around as much as today but no-one talked about it.

I don't think that period can be held-up as an example of "the good old days".

Originally posted by twichibi

JonJParr. What you have just said is completely irrelevant as this is your own personal point of view.

I hardly think it is irrelevant given I have asked for peoples opinions on this????

What do the girls think on it?

Moon

Originally posted by Moon Maiden
I hardly think it is irrelevant given I have asked for peoples opinions on this????
Moon

Well I think it is if it isn't true. What's the point in talking about 50 or so years ago... that IMO is irrelevant.

Originally posted by twichibi

I know someone who constantly gets bullied and picked on because he's a virgin.

JonJParr. What you have just said is completely irrelevant as this is your own personal point of view. Granted, some people will share this point of view (mainly of the same generation). The fact of the matter is, like Nick said, the world we live in today is a whole lot different to what it used to be, and people are generally respected more for having a bit of experience.


Wrong. I totally agree with JonJParr.

How on earth is his view totally irrelevant? Because you don't agree with it? Little point in having a Forum then if we're all supposed to agree with each other!

Two further points:

a) the guy who is constantly picked on because he's a virgin has, excuse the pun, more balls than his so-called peers. Great, let's bully someone into losing their sexuality. Why? Because

b) 'people are generally respected more for having a bit of experience'?

If that's what you call respect, then the meaning of the word has changed an awful lot in the last 20 years or so.

Appears to me most young folk lack respect for THEMSELVES.

perhaps not...as I said I don't think age is really an issue here...it is how we view it in general.

Our talk on it last night went along the same lines as is here. I think my initial reaction to seeing a guy with a wallett full would be quite 'prudish' aswell even more so if I were on a date with him.
I would be concerned i think about it. Which is stupid really considering the risks we take nowadays with HIV and other STDs.

Moon

Casual sex. Been here before me thinks.

What the heck was he carrying a load of condoms for? In case the first ten split? Get to know the female or male; start up a relationship; go back to his or her place. Condoms, if required, kept in a drawer or whatever.

Why do you need more than a couple unless you are going to sleep around, or unless you want to impress?

Some people have no values any more. And if people were impressed by the sight of a few condoms - well - does not say much about them does it?

Dragon

My first thought would be ' I wonder if there's any strawberry ones...'

I think it's a good thing he's responsible, and relaxed and confident enough not to feel ashamed for having them on him ~ I don't understand why people have such a hang up about someone being a bit confident.

It will also stop him having to wander around say ooh..Blackpool at 3am trying to find an open garage to buy some....

Memories ;)

Originally posted by twichibi
What you have just said is completely irrelevant as this is your own personal point of view.

A personal point of view is completely irrelevant? Now, forgive me if I'm mistaken but isn't the whole point of discussion to express, debate and convey one's personal points of view on a given subject? Isn't that the whole point of this Internet forum?

Why then is it 'completely irrelevant'? Given that the view you expressed in your post is also a 'personal point of view' is it "irrelevant" also or is that award bestowed only upon those who disagree with you?

Perhaps people within your social circle [or grade?] judge and respect people based on their sexual prowess but the one of which I am part certainly does not. Actually I'm intrigued, do you sit around in your local drinking establishment discussing how you [...and I think this is the correct phrase] "nobbed your bird" the previous evening? Do you have scorecards with which you can record outstanding performances?

What a sadcake.

Originally posted by Ousetunes
Wrong. I totally agree with JonJParr.

How on earth is his view totally irrelevant? Because you don't agree with it? Little point in having a Forum then if we're all supposed to agree with each other!

Two further points:

a) the guy who is constantly picked on because he's a virgin has, excuse the pun, more balls than his so-called peers. Great, let's bully someone into losing their sexuality. Why? Because

b) 'people are generally respected more for having a bit of experience'?

If that's what you call respect, then the meaning of the word has changed an awful lot in the last 20 years or so.

Appears to me most young folk lack respect for THEMSELVES.

I was talking about the fact that referring to what life was like 50 or so years ago is irrelevant to this discussion. Despite what you think Ousetunes that is how things are these days, it's about time some people got used to that whether they like it or not.

]Originally posted by Ousetunes the guy who is constantly picked on because he's a virgin has, excuse the pun, more balls than his so-called peers. Great, let's bully someone into losing their sexuality. Why? Because

Why are you asking me, I don't bully him?????

I just want to know why the lad was carrying an 'impressive' collection of condoms?

What is meant by impressive? Quantity or variety? And who were the folk who were impressed and why?

I'll get rid of the money in my wallet and stock up on varieties of condoms if that is all it takes to impress these days ;)

Dragon

Originally posted by JonJParr
Actually I'm intrigued, do you sit around in your local drinking establishment discussing how you [...and I think this is the correct phrase] "nobbed your bird" the previous evening? Do you have scorecards with which you can record outstanding performances?

If you spend 10 minutes in any bar in Sheffield on a Saturday night thats the kind of conversation that you will hear if you are stood near a group of young men.

(I've heard that the ladies have similar conversations, but in the ladies loo, not in the bar)

Originally posted by twichibi
I Despite what you think Ousetunes that is how things are these days, it's about time some people got used to that whether they like it or not.

I'm sure getting used to it.

All I need do is watch the amount of NI/PAYE deductions taken from me to house, feed and clothe these unwanted babies.

I'd hazard a guess I'm paying five-fold what you contribute.

Originally posted by nick2
If you spend 10 minutes in any bar in Sheffield on a Saturday night thats the kind of conversation that you will hear if you are stood near a group of young men.

(I've heard that the ladies have similar conversations, but in the ladies loo, not in the bar)

But that doesn't have any bearing on whether we should be doing it does it Nick? I hate to be accused of any form of snobbery here but isn't conversation along these lines just a bit 'common'? Certainly the company I keep would never dream of disecting the details of their sexual relationships with me or anyone else for that matter.

Originally posted by JonJParr
A personal point of view is completely irrelevant? Now, forgive me if I'm mistaken but isn't the whole point of discussion to express, debate and convey one's personal points of view on a given subject? Isn't that the whole point of this Internet forum?

Why then is it 'completely irrelevant'? Given that the view you expressed in your post is also a 'personal point of view' is it "irrelevant" also or is that award bestowed only upon those who disagree with you?

Perhaps people within your social circle [or grade?] judge and respect people based on their sexual prowess but the one of which I am part certainly does not. Actually I'm intrigued, do you sit around in your local drinking establishment discussing how you [...and I think this is the correct phrase] "nobbed your bird" the previous evening? Do you have scorecards with which you can record outstanding performances?

What a sadcake.

I've already explained. People like you who are unwilling to wake up to today's world and realise the attitudes towards sex have changed an awful lot compared to 50 years ago is what the problem is. You know Jon I actually thought you were quite a mature person until you reverted to name calling. And is it really justified??? Calling me a sadcake and making a judgement that is completely untrue :loopy:. To clear things up, no, I do not brag about having sex in my local drinking establishment. What an extraordinary judgement to make when YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW ME.

I apologise when I said your point of view was irrelevant. Although I didn't agree with it, I shouldn't have said that. Now if you are half as decent as me, I shall expect an apology with regards to the above.

Originally posted by Dragon
I just want to know why the lad was carrying an 'impressive' collection of condoms?
What is meant by impressive? Quantity or variety? And who were the folk who were impressed and why?


It was just a phrase...the appearance of a number of condoms in his wallet was met with...."ooooooooooooooooo" followed by the comments mentioned.

What they said and did is really why I started this thread to find out if it were just us lot or if other people had issues with it.

Moon

Originally posted by Dragon
Why do you need more than a couple unless you are going to sleep around, or unless you want to impress?


Cos sometimes things happen more than once a night? ;) Better to be prepared, you don't know if the other person will have condoms in their drawer or not.

Anyhoo, maybe he just likes giving the lasses a choice :heyhey:

Originally posted by JonJParr
Certainly the company I keep would never dream of disecting the details of their sexual relationships with me or anyone else for that matter.

Perhaps not now, but when you were young and single I imagine you went around with different people to the ones you hang with now ?

When I go out now with my mates, most of who are in relationships, we don't realy talk about sex, but when we were all single, sex, and how to get it, it was the main topic of conversation.

Originally posted by Ousetunes
I'd hazard a guess I'm paying five-fold what you contribute.

:clap: :clap: :clap: Big up to Ousetunes.

OMG :o What has this got to do with anything. YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW ME, how can you make this wildly immature accusation. Why don't you just come out and tell me what you really think and I'll tell you if it's true, you seem to know so much about me afterall.

Sorry if my post has been misread MoonMaiden. I was not insinuating that you was one of those people impressed. Far from it as I know the contrary is probably true.

And thanks for answering my question concerning the use of the word "Impressive".

Still would like to know if there are people on the forum who would consider a collection of condoms as impressive in the 'oooooo' department and why they would think this?

I remember when the word codoms had us kiddies sniggering away, and buying them from the chemist was a dare. We only bought them to fill with water and throw around the classroom anyhow.

Dragon

Originally posted by twichibi
I've already explained. People like you who are unwilling to wake up to today's world and realise the attitudes towards sex have changed an awful lot compared to 50 years ago is what the problem is. You know Jon I actually thought you were quite a mature person until you reverted to name calling. And is it really justified??? Calling me a sadcake and making a judgement that is completely untrue :loopy:. To clear things up, no, I do not brag about having sex in my local drinking establishment. What an extraordinary judgement to make when YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW ME.

I apologise when I said your point of view was irrelevant. Although I didn't agree with it, I shouldn't have said that. Now if you are half as decent as me, I shall expect an apology with regards to the above.

Since my post was in reaction to a claim that you made about my personal views being 'irrelevant' and that sexual prowess was somehow the pretext for respect and being held in high regard I make no apologies for what I wrote. If indeed you don't "brag about having sex" to acquaintances then can I deduce that they don't then respect you? After all, I'm drawing this conclusion based on the criteria you set out.

I think you need to reassess your conclusion that 'traditional' views are always irrelevant.

Originally posted by Dragon
Sorry if my post has been misread MoonMaiden. I was not insinuating that you was one of those people impressed. Far from it as I know the contrary is probably true.

And thanks for answering my question concerning the use of the word "Impressive".

Still would like to know if there are people on the forum who would consider a collection of condoms as impressive in the 'oooooo' department and why they would think this?


I actually thought it was quite sweet...bless him. And was impressed if only because he was being responsible. Tho why he had so many I am not sure.....i thought it was standard for guys to carry at least one?

Originally posted by JonJParr
Since my post was in reaction to a claim that you made about my personal views being 'irrelevant' and that sexual prowess was somehow the pretext for respect and being held in high regard I make no apologies for what I wrote. If indeed you don't "brag about having sex" to acquaintances then can I deduce that they don't then respect you? After all, I'm drawing this conclusion based on the criteria you set out.

How mature of you. :rolleyes:

No you're not. I said that people generally get more respect for having sexual experiences. I didn't say: People get more respect for talking/bragging about sex.

Try reading what I say next time.

He was being responsible. Later that night he got together with a girl only they could not have sex cos he spent all night looking for a banana.

Sex edu these days. Sigh.

I am definitely stocking up on condoms - which I do not use except to fill with water if that makes a person sweet.

;) :) ;)

Dragon

Originally posted by twichibi
I said that people generally get more respect for having sexual experiences. I didn't say: People get more respect for talking/bragging about sex.

How can the two not come hand in hand? In order to gain this 'respect' for having more sexual experience you must have to convey [ie. talk] about them. If what you say is true, I can't believe that an entire social circle doesn't discuss what you claim to be the intrinsic factor of their social hierarchy. Isn't it a sad state of affairs when relationships / friendships / personal respect is based on past performances in the bedroom.

You're correct in that you didn't say it but on the other hand I didn't misread what you wrote I looked at what the implications might be also. Perhaps you should do the same.

ps: When I pitch for a business consultancy contract nobody ever asks me "So how many times have you had sex in one night?". Now [I]that is 'irrelevant'.

I'd be a little more worried for whoever he might end up with, bearing in mind that the shelf life of latex condoms kept in the warm and frequently flexed environment in a wallet can be as low as 2 months (latex condoms really ARE that fragile) before they are significantly damamged.

The answer to this is to replace the small number that you carry as often as possible, rather than carry your whole supply with you and have them all useless when you come to use them.

BUt well done to the responsible young man for considering STIs and contraception in the first place. Too many people still fail to protect themselves and their partners.

Originally posted by JonJParr
ps: When I pitch for a business consultancy contract nobody ever asks me "So how many times have you had sex in one night?". Now that is 'irrelevant'.

They might if you were doing a consultancy for a brothel ?

never carried any. any girl willing for sex on a first date or first meeting was not really of interest to me.
neither has getting my end away been a high priority without at least knowing more than the girls name or what she drinks.

Originally posted by JonJParr

ps: When I pitch for a business consultancy contract nobody ever asks me "So how many times have you had sex in one night?". Now that is 'irrelevant'.

Is this in reference to something I said???

Not a believer in love at first site then willman?

Wish things were as straight forwards for me as they are for you. Sometimes things just have a way of happening. You cannot plan for every eventuality.

Dragon

Jon,

I'm concerned that you're making quite a few false accusations about me. Let me just make it clear that some of the comments I have made in this discussion are not in reference to my personal sex life. I'm 23 years old and have had a steady partner for 18 months. I'm not a slag (not that you called me one) and I personally don't talk about my sex life with my mates if I can avoid it. I go out regularly at weekends around town and frequently hear men and women, girls and boys talking about sex which is why I am able to comment on this.

Originally posted by Dragon
Not a believer in love at first site then willman?

Wish things were as straight forwards for me as they are for you. Sometimes things just have a way of happening. You cannot plan for every eventuality.

Dragon

sure but lurvvv's a different thing, doesnt mean that there's a need for the rustling of undergarments in the ncp at the first meeting.

if your plan is not to take advantage of someone with looser morals than your own there is no other issue.
however if i was the type to have sex with numerous people perhaps i wold have the responsibility to be prepared.

Can't fault you there matey. What's this word ya keep throwing around anyhow - 'sex'?

I usually get to know a female first before anything intimate takes place, but there has been an exception to the rule. That aside - all this talk of STD's --- doesn't anyone get to know the person they are intending to sleep with any more?

Is it - out with the old fellah/lass and in with the new faster than you can say jaffa cakes?

Moral values have gone straight down the can it seems.

Dragon

Originally posted by Dragon

I usually get to know a female first before anything intimate takes place, but there has been an exception to the rule. That aside - all this talk of STD's --- doesn't anyone get to know the person they are intending to sleep with any more?

Is it - out with the old fellah/lass and in with the new faster than you can say jaffa cakes?

Moral values have gone straight down the can it seems.

Dragon

One night stands are nothing new you know. And before you ask I've not had one.

Originally posted by Dragon
Moral values have gone straight down the can it seems.


"Morality is simply the attitude we adopt towards people whom we personally dislike."

Oscar Wilde

Originally posted by willman
never carried any. any girl willing for sex on a first date or first meeting was not really of interest to me.
neither has getting my end away been a high priority without at least knowing more than the girls name or what she drinks.

so if it's the the 3rd or 4th or 100th date are they not required then?

I don't really see how being prepared by carrying one or many condoms with you is being anything other than sensible. It's not an indication of loose morals or anything else.

The whole issue of who should/should not and when people should and should not have sex is a personal one.
Certainly the prevailing attitude today is more liberal than in the past, which I personally think is a good thing. I see no reason why sex should be thought of as slightly dirty or seedy, or why it should have to be hidden away. It's a natural thing to do, it's fun, and as long as it's responsibly done (which would involve getting condoms from somewhere) then it's harmless.

Originally posted by Cyclone
so if it's the the 3rd or 4th or 100th date are they not required then?

I don't really see how being prepared by carrying one or many condoms with you is being anything other than sensible. It's not an indication of loose morals or anything else.

The whole issue of who should/should not and when people should and should not have sex is a personal one.
Certainly the prevailing attitude today is more liberal than in the past, which I personally think is a good thing. I see no reason why sex should be thought of as slightly dirty or seedy, or why it should have to be hidden away. It's a natural thing to do, it's fun, and as long as it's responsibly done (which would involve getting condoms from somewhere) then it's harmless.

but the post started re: a guy with condoms in his wallet not on a date - but potentially out on the pull or being prepared for if he strikes it lucky.
all i stated was that I dont agree with the need for them in such a scenario or on a first date.

Originally posted by twichibi
Jon,

I'm concerned that you're making quite a few false accusations about me. Let me just make it clear that some of the comments I have made in this discussion are not in reference to my personal sex life. I'm 23 years old and have had a steady partner for 18 months. I'm not a slag (not that you called me one) and I personally don't talk about my sex life with my mates if I can avoid it. I go out regularly at weekends around town and frequently hear men and women, girls and boys talking about sex which is why I am able to comment on this.

My comments [I don't believe I made accusations] were based on your own views put forward on this thread. Firstly, you put forward that traditional and personal views were 'irrelevant'. Secondly, you informed us that "generally" sexual experience was met with respect and admiration. On the third, you conveyed that despite respect being achieved within your social circle based on sexual experience no one ever discussed it.

Perhaps this casts some light on why I made the comments that I did. Having said all that I do believe that you're not a "slag" and that you probably don't discuss the private details of your sex life in a public setting. On the other hand I do think you have some rather warped views about how respect is earnt and you might like to reconsider your view that being conservative and couth in this day and age is somehow irrelevant to modern society. Personally I think the two can run side by side.

:)

Originally posted by Cyclone
so if it's the the 3rd or 4th or 100th date are they not required then?

I don't really see how being prepared by carrying one or many condoms with you is being anything other than sensible. It's not an indication of loose morals or anything else.

The whole issue of who should/should not and when people should and should not have sex is a personal one.
Certainly the prevailing attitude today is more liberal than in the past, which I personally think is a good thing. I see no reason why sex should be thought of as slightly dirty or seedy, or why it should have to be hidden away. It's a natural thing to do, it's fun, and as long as it's responsibly done (which would involve getting condoms from somewhere) then it's harmless.

Glad you joined this discussion Cyclone. I'm having trouble making some of the older generation see that that's how things are these days - it's not my point of view, it's real.

nick2 - your Oscar Wilde quote indicates that in this instance he was not thinking. Morals are something that we as individuals choose for ourselves and then live by. It is not a case of judging other people by them, but judging ourselves - which would make the quote a bit pointless.

My moral attitude is my own, and I do not judge others by the same yardstick as I judge myself.

One night stands - I have heard of them. Are they a bit like when you are new at a job and get sent to the shop for a long stand?

Why carry condoms around with you Cyclone? You after a quickie in the back of a car or something? Can you not be bothered to take your business home? Sex being dirty or seedy? Far from it. However - you try explaining that when a police man catches you at it in a public carpark and see if he is impressed. Sex should be between two consenting adults - I think we are all agreed on that much. Liberal thinking does not equate to correct thinking, and I am not saying what is correct or not - just that because something is acceptable these days does not make it right.

The rest is down to personal choice.

Dragon

Originally posted by twichibi
Glad you joined this discussion Cyclone. I'm having trouble making some of the older generation see that that's how things are these days - it's not my point of view, it's real.

less of the old.
i understand fully that sex on the bonnet of a car in the ncp is part of modern life, or that blow jobs in the alley have always happened.
we as "gentlemen" ( in our opinion) would prefer not to take part in it, i don't think it's wrong per se just not the type of "relationship" or "dangerous sport" i would like to take part in.

Originally posted by Dragon
nick2 - your Oscar Wilde quote indicates that in this instance he was not thinking. Morals are something that we as individuals choose for ourselves and then live by. It is not a case of judging other people by them, but judging ourselves - which would make the quote a bit pointless.

My moral attitude is my own, and I do not judge others by the same yardstick as I judge myself.


I do apologise then, your comment seemd (to me) to imply you were judging everyone else and finding them lacking, so I thought the quote was appropriate.

Originally posted by JonJParr
My comments [I don't believe I made accusations] were based on your own views put forward on this thread. Firstly, you put forward that traditional and personal views were 'irrelevant'. Secondly, you informed us that "generally" sexual experience was met with respect and admiration. On the third, you conveyed that despite respect being achieved within your social circle based on sexual experience no one ever discussed it.

Perhaps this casts some light on why I made the comments that I did. Having said all that I do believe that you're not a "slag" and that you probably don't discuss the private details of your sex life in a public setting. On the other hand I do think you have some rather warped views about how respect is earnt and you might like to reconsider your view that being conservative and couth in this day and age is somehow irrelevant to modern society. Personally I think the two can run side by side.

:)

Once again, where did I say Admiration??? They are your words. Do you seriously think I make the rules?? I am simply commenting on past experiences involving myself and some of my friends. It's true to say that some people get bullied and humiliated if they're a virgin because some of my friends have had it in the past and I would have hated to be in their shoes.

I hope you can see what I am saying. You don't have to talk about it every time but people know if you have a sexual partner and nothing is said.

BTW I know it's only a film but have you seen American Pie?? Good example...

Originally posted by willman
but the post started re: a guy with condoms in his wallet not on a date - but potentially out on the pull or being prepared for if he strikes it lucky.
all i stated was that I dont agree with the need for them in such a scenario or on a first date.

So when exactly would you put one into your wallet, 2nd date, 3rd date??? Surely it's easier to just carry one and thus be prepared whichever date number you happen to be on.

There's definitely some judging based on morality going on in this thread, so it's rather disingenious to claim that morals are not used to make judgements.
What if you take 'the business' (see, you have to use a euphemism) to her place only to find out that she's not got the same forethough as you. Now you have to go and find somewhere that sells them.

Hold on, you're not saying that liberal thinking is right or wrong, but you are saying that just because something is acceptable doesn't make it right. So you don't think that casual sex is 'right', but you don't judge based on your own morals? I think i'm confused.


to go right back to Jons original post in this thread
Perhaps it's just my Conservative tradition but does anybody else find the thought of carrying condoms around presumably in the hope of [to coin a phrase the young ones are using] 'getting some' a little crass in itself?

Now I'm not a prude by any stretch of the imagination but carrying condoms around all seems a bit lewd to me.

Firstly, I don't see why it's in the hope. Maybe the guy has a girlfriend and it's in the sure knowledge.
Crass - crude and unrefined. Nope I don't see that, thoughtful and responsible is closer to the mark.
Lewd - preoccupied with sex, or obscene and indecent. Nope, i don't see it again.

I think it's your conservative stance and strong words (judgemental ones even) that have put the more liberal minded members backs up.
It gives the impression that you think that sex is 'dirty' and shouldn't be spoken about. All references to it should be hidden and to admit to wanting or having casual sex would be a shameful thing.

Originally posted by willman
less of the old.
i understand fully that sex on the bonnet of a car in the ncp is part of modern life, or that blow jobs in the alley have always happened.
we as "gentlemen" ( in our opinion) would prefer not to take part in it, i don't think it's wrong per se just not the type of "relationship" or "dangerous sport" i would like to take part in.

Ok sorry about the old. I have no problem at all with your personal views on sex and I'm glad that you can see that these things happen. I just don't see why (as long as precautions are taken) it offends people so much. There's probably people out there that don't like sex at all but I wouldn't for one minute argue their decisions.

Originally posted by Cyclone
So when exactly would you put one into your wallet, 2nd date, 3rd date??? Surely it's easier to just carry one and thus be prepared whichever date number you happen to be on.

when i determined that the relationship warranted a condom or 2.

There's definitely some judging based on morality going on in this thread, so it's rather disingenious to claim that morals are not used to make judgements.

peoples morals are there own like there opinions, i live life by mine that's all.

What if you take 'the business' (see, you have to use a euphemism) to her place only to find out that she's not got the same forethough as you. Now you have to go and find somewhere that sells them.

abstain - the world won't collapse.not having been int his situation i douldn't comment, perhaps if we knew we were going back to hers for sex i could spend £2 in the toilets first, easily done without having to brag about it or mention it.

Hold on, you're not saying that liberal thinking is right or wrong, but you are saying that just because something is acceptable doesn't make it right. So you don't think that casual sex is 'right', but you don't judge based on your own morals? I think i'm confused.


if people want casual sex then they should go for it, it's not my place to tell you or anyone else what to do. however i wouldnt do it - whats confusing about that. speaking from experience i'm probably one of the most liberal people you could meet, (or should that be sex obsessed pervert)

you typed your reply inside the quote, now it looks like i've started talking back to myself.

I'm just trying to say that just because he had condoms with him didn't necessarily mean that he does have one night stands or casual sex. Although if he does then I don't see why anyone needs to or has the right to pass judgement on that.

Originally posted by twichibi
Ok sorry about the old. I have no problem at all with your personal views on sex and I'm glad that you can see that these things happen. I just don't see why (as long as precautions are taken) it offends people so much. There's probably people out there that don't like sex at all but I wouldn't for one minute argue their decisions.

i'm not offended by it.
i just have a different personal perspective on the matter.
sometimes being prepared from the mans point of view can "force" a woman to comply in certain circumstances.
women who "put it about" unfortunatley become known for it & tarnished a bit. some women do it to trap men into relationships.

Originally posted by Cyclone
you typed your reply inside the quote, now it looks like i've started talking back to myself.

I'm just trying to say that just because he had condoms with him didn't necessarily mean that he does have one night stands or casual sex. Although if he does then I don't see why anyone needs to or has the right to pass judgement on that.

oh well at least i tried.
agree fully didn't realise that i had made that supposition.
we dont have a right to make a judgement, but our opinion was asked for in the post.

Originally posted by willman

sometimes being prepared from the mans point of view can "force" a woman to comply in certain circumstances.
women who "put it about" unfortunatley become known for it & tarnished a bit. some women do it to trap men into relationships.

I can't see how keeping a condom in your wallet hidden away can 'force' a woman into complying. If a woman does feel forced into sex then that is all down to the mans behaviour and attitude, not because they carry a condom.

So when exactly would you put one into your wallet, 2nd date, 3rd date??? Surely it's easier to just carry one and thus be prepared whichever date number you happen to be on.

I would hope to take the female either to her place or mine - preferably mine - where, if I used condoms I would have a supply in the bedroom or where ever. I would not carry them around in the hope of getting romantic in a car park or alley.

There's definitely some judging based on morality going on in this thread, so it's rather disingenious to claim that morals are not used to make judgements.

We put forwards our points of view and compare them to others. That is not passing judgement but offering ourt own viewpoints. Sometimes people change their views when new information is available concerning those morals. That you may find it morally acceptable to have a quickie in the back of a car is your business. My morals would not allow it. That is not judging you.

What if you take 'the business' (see, you have to use a euphemism) to her place only to find out that she's not got the same forethough as you. Now you have to go and find somewhere that sells them.

You could always state that you have no protection and maybe put it off to another night. The choice is ultimately yours, as are the consequences.

Hold on, you're not saying that liberal thinking is right or wrong, but you are saying that just because something is acceptable doesn't make it right. So you don't think that casual sex is 'right', but you don't judge based on your own morals? I think i'm confused.

I am not saying it is right or wrong. I am saying that just because something is viewed in a liberal manner these days does not make it automatically right. What is the problem? Does not seem complicated to me. Just cos you think something is right does not make it so. I do not think casual sex is right. That is my opinion and something I live by. It is not a statement that if you choose to believe otherwise then you are wrong.

Do you have a problem understanding that people with different morals to your own can live by them and let you live by yours without a problem? Should we all live life by your yardstick in order for it to be right?

If you want to walk around with 50 condoms in your pocket and have sex on every streeet corner then that is your business, but I do not have to accept it as being right.

Your confusion confuses me.

Dragon

well, we have that in common at least.
Of course people are free to live by their own morals.

If you accept that you might end up back at her place to find that she has no condoms then why not be prepared in teh first place. It doesn't mean that you're about to have sex in a carpark or a park.
Some people are definitely passing judgement, rather than just sharing opinions. Or at least that's how it sounds to me.

I think I see part of why I say you're passing judgement.
To declare something right or wrong is to have made a judgement on it, and thus on anyone who does or doesn't do that.

I'm obviously perfectly happy for you not to partake of casual sex, but say that it's wrong is to make a judgement about it and by extension about the people that do indulge in it.
Much in the same way that we say murder is wrong, and thus say that people who murder someone have done wrong and must be punished.

Casual sex is not right or wrong. It's a personal decision to each of us whether we choose to have it or not, but we shouldn't judge it.

Originally posted by Dragon
[B]That you may find it morally acceptable to have a quickie in the back of a car is your business. My morals would not allow it. That is not judging you.


But saying that "morals have gone down the pan" does sound a bit like "everyone elses morals have gone down the toilet, but not mine", unless yours have too ?

Get over this judgement thing Cyclone. I aint judging anyone. I judge myself by the standards I set - full stop.

The original post was about someone with an 'impressive' collection of durex in his wallet. Aside from the fact I have issue with 'impressive' my posts relate to this.

Considering your posts and comments - how would this taking a lass back to her place justify having a wallet 'impressively' full of condoms?

I did not declare something as right or wrong for other people - but for myself. I am allowed to choose my moral values am I not? When I impose them on others then I am wrong, perhaps.

Dragon

Originally posted by twichibi
I can't see how keeping a condom in your wallet hidden away can 'force' a woman into complying. If a woman does feel forced into sex then that is all down to the mans behaviour and attitude, not because they carry a condom.

producing a condom with the everything will be fine routine - is a way of forcing compliance.if the girl has refused because she isn't on the pill etc etc.
believe me it does happen - especially if they have gone back to one of the persons digs.

obviously keeping it hidden isn't - but i do think that both sides of this discussion are being a little blinkered in their opinions.

Originally posted by nick2
But saying that "morals have gone down the pan" does sound a bit like "everyone elses morals have gone down the toilet, but not mine", unless yours have too ?

I take a look at the moral standards of yesteryear and compare them to the morals of today and in many instances I see they appear to have declined. There are many many things that are acceptable today that would not have been in the past.

We have so many things to be grateful for this decline in moral standards, in my opinion --- Not.

I, personally, will stick with the morals I have always had and VIEW others in that light - though I will leave it to them to do as they will.

Dragon

I disagree, you are judging, you said that casual sex is wrong, thus you think that people who have casual sex are doing something that is wrong.

I think impressive might have been a bad choice of words, it is strange if he's carrying more than 3 or 4 though...

Of course you can choose your own morality (as much as it's chosen anyway).


Moral
Of or concerned with the judgment of the goodness or badness of human action and character: moral scrutiny; a moral quandary.

Our morals are an inherent basis for judgement of others behaviour though. It's just the way it is.

Originally posted by Dragon

Moral values have gone straight down the can it seems.

Dragon

also...

I take a look at the moral standards of yesteryear and compare them to the morals of today and in many instances I see they appear to have declined. There are many many things that are acceptable today that would not have been in the past.

But these are your moral standards Dragon don't you see. Just look at people like George Best, it used to happen back in the 'yesteryear' as well you know.

Originally posted by Dragon
I take a look at the moral standards of yesteryear and compare them to the morals of today and in many instances I see they appear to have declined. There are many many things that are acceptable today that would not have been in the past.

We have so many things to be grateful for this decline in moral standards, in my opinion --- Not.

I, personally, will stick with the morals I have always had and VIEW others in that light - though I will leave it to them to do as they will.

Dragon

and vice versa.

Slavery, used to be acceptable, not now.
Sending children to work, down the mines, or in the mills, not considered acceptable now.
Schooling, used to be acceptable to not school girls, they didn't need it afterall to be a good wife.
Beating of children, used to be common place and perfectly normal.
etc....
The morals of today are both more protective of individual rights and less oppresive of indivual rights. Liberal I suppose.

Cyclone - you keep misreading or just not bothering to take note. Maybe I should type out a long winded post making sure that nothing is taken for granted. I say that casual sex for me is wrong. If Joe Bloggs wants to sleep with everyone he meets then that's his business.
I can disagree with something without saying that the people I disagree with are wrong. I state that I simply disagree with them.

You also misread or misposted the quote as there is no mention of others in that. What you have is the judgement of the goodness or badness of human action - but that can apply to self-judgement can it not?

If you are going to be judged then that's the business of a higher power than me. I accept and acknowledge this.

However - just to backtrack - I do judge others at times - such as people who murder. I believe them to be in the wrong and would judge them by such. So - I would like to point out that my non-judgemental attitude is with regards to sexual encounters.

Dragon

twichibi - I have made no claims to the contrary concerning my own morals being my own and not indicative of right or wrong of others. My morals are my own and they remove the chance of me having meaningless one night stands. If the contrary floats your boat then go for it. No problems.

Are we to assume that slavery and such were not viewed as being morally wrong? Surely if this was the case then they would still be part of our society? Is it not possible that many thought these things to be morally wrong and thus action was taken?

Dragon

Originally posted by nick2
If you spend 10 minutes in any bar in Sheffield on a Saturday night thats the kind of conversation that you will hear if you are stood near a group of young men.


So you think that everything a young lad says to his mates on a Saturday night in a bar is the Gospel Truth? :suspect:

It couldn't be that he's trying to impress his equally-insecure mates that he's a real man of the world? The one-upmanship then begins..... truth takes a large leap out the window.....

StarSparkle

PS I agree completely with what JonJParr's been saying.

Originally posted by StarSparkle
So you think that everything a young lad says to his mates on a Saturday night in a bar is the Gospel Truth? :suspect:



Errrm, no, I said "thats what they are talking about", I don't usually have a lie detector with me on a night out.

This thread is by its very nature discussing our own moral judgements of a person based on how many or if any condoms they may happen to have in their wallet.

Whether you see them as a slapper or responsible.

perhaps I put the cat amongst the pigeons on this one :suspect:

I would say the thread is asking opinions rather than asking us to pass judgement.

Its good to have a cat among the pigeons every now and then.

Anyhow - I shall leave the floor open to further debate.

Enjoy yourselves ;)

Dragon

Originally posted by nick2
Errrm, no, I said "thats what they are talking about", I don't usually have a lie detector with me on a night out.

So you admit you have no idea whether what they're saying is fact, or whether it's actually complete fairy-tales - yet you have no problem using it to help 'prove' your argument in a debate?

Sloppy, Nick - very sloppy

StarSparkle

Originally posted by Moon Maiden
This thread is by its very nature discussing our own moral judgements of a person based on how many or if any condoms they may happen to have in their wallet.

Whether you see them as a slapper or responsible.

perhaps I put the cat amongst the pigeons on this one :suspect:

Because I can't understand for one minute why it would be deemed anything other than responsible. The people that disagree are probably the same ones that complain about high teenage pregnancy rates.

Originally posted by Dragon
I would say the thread is asking opinions rather than asking us to pass judgement.

Dragon

Didn't ask you to pass judgement on each other...but by giving your opinions on the subject...you are in this case passing a moral judgement

Dodgy ground I guess

Moon

Originally posted by StarSparkle
So you admit you have no idea whether what they're saying is fact, or whether it's actually complete fairy-tales - yet you have no problem using it to help 'prove' your argument in a debate?


I'm not using it to 'prove' anything, I was just saying that thats what people talk about in pubs.

Ive not read all the posts,but IMO i have the up most respect for anyone that carry protection for safe sex no matter how many they have on them.It proves to me that person has not only respect on him/herself but also respect for the other person too.May not mean that person sleeps arround to many time and if they did at least they not spreading nothing as well to anyone els.

Originally posted by StarSparkle
So you admit you have no idea whether what they're saying is fact, or whether it's actually complete fairy-tales - yet you have no problem using it to help 'prove' your argument in a debate?

Sloppy, Nick - very sloppy

StarSparkle

What are you going on about?? This is besides the point. He was simply replying to when John asked if I go around my local drinking establishments bragging that I ****** a bird. To which he is saying, that's the kind of thing people talk about in pubs.

Why jump into this thread and try to cause an arguement straight away?

Originally posted by dieselbabe
Ive not read all the posts,but IMO i have the up most respect for anyone that carry protection for safe sex no matter how many they have on them.It proves to me that person has not only respect on him/herself but also respect for the other person too.May not mean that person sleeps arround to many time and if they did at least they not spreading nothing as well to anyone els.

Nice to have a female point of view :thumbsup:

Originally posted by nick2
I don't usually have a lie detector with me on a night out.

I don't think you need a lie detector nick, just check the' use by' dates on the condoms.........I think you will find a different story starts to emerge........

Originally posted by Dragon
I say that casual sex for me is wrong. If Joe Bloggs wants to sleep with everyone he meets then that's his business.
I can disagree with something without saying that the people I disagree with are wrong. I state that I simply disagree with them.

You also misread or misposted the quote as there is no mention of others in that. What you have is the judgement of the goodness or badness of human action - but that can apply to self-judgement can it not?


Dragon

have sex on every streeet corner then that is your business, but I do not have to accept it as being right

So if you don't accept it as right, then you think it's wrong.

I did not misread or misquote the reference to morality. Look it up yourself if you like, it was from dictionary.com It can obviously be applied to yourself, but I fail to see how you can say that an action is wrong and yet not be saying that the people who perform that action are wrong.
I don't have casual sex either. I don't think it's wrong though, it's just not something I want to do. I also don't eat brussel sprouts, I don't think that eating them is wrong, I just choose not too. I don't murder people either, I do however think that this is wrong, and that someone else who murders is doing wrong.

My examples regarding slavery etc.. were supposed to show that whilst morals have changed, it's certainly not all for the worse.

Originally society accepted slavery, whilst a few people may have thought it was wrong it certainly wasn't enough to stop it. Overtime those feelings changed and eventually something was done about it.
Over the last 40 years we've moved from allowing teachers to hit children with a cane, to making it illegal for parents to slap the backside of a child hard enough to cause significant redness. It's not that 40 years ago people secretly thought it was wrong, it's just that feelings have changed.

MM - that's exactly what i've been trying to say.

Originally posted by nick2
I'm not using it to 'prove' anything, I was just saying that thats what people talk about in pubs.

But you were using the fact that young men love to 'big themselves up' in public to try to legitimise your opinion that sleeping around with all and sundry is the 'norm' today.

Men have always overstated their 'success rate' and no doubt always will. What concerns me is that young, vulnerable people will get the message that sleeping around is respected by their peers, and think that's the truth, when in reality it's mostly people just bragging.

Look at Twichibi on this thread - she obviously thinks that how people behave in films like "American Pie" is how they behave in the real world - IT'S ALL FANTASY, for heaven's sake! The media in general specialises in trying to convince us that the 'extreme' is the 'norm' - if you think that films relate to any sort of reality, you're in a lot of trouble.

StarSparkle

so you think that in reality people are mostly still virgins when they get married and have only one partner in their life? (As I imagine it used to be in say the victorian era).

Originally posted by twichibi
What are you going on about?? This is besides the point. He was simply replying to when John asked if I go around my local drinking establishments bragging that I ****** a bird. To which he is saying, that's the kind of thing people talk about in pubs.

Why jump into this thread and try to cause an arguement straight away?

Because you're talking a complete load of b*******

And I'll say what I like on any thread - I don't need any say-so from you, whoever you are.

I'm just concerned that your bizarre attitudes - like thinking films like "American Pie" bear any relation to reality - might actually influence vulnerable teenagers, and give them a completely false idea of the sort of behaviour that generates 'respect'.

StarSparkle

PS Sorry if my arguments are over your head :rolleyes:

Originally posted by StarSparkle
But you were using the fact that young men love to 'big themselves up' in public to try to legitimise your opinion that sleeping around with all and sundry is the 'norm' today.

Men have always overstated their 'success rate' and no doubt always will. What concerns me is that young, vulnerable people will get the message that sleeping around is respected by their peers, and think that's the truth, when in reality it's mostly people just bragging.

Look at Twichibi on this thread - she obviously thinks that how people behave in films like "American Pie" is how they behave in the real world - IT'S ALL FANTASY, for heaven's sake! The media in general specialises in trying to convince us that the 'extreme' is the 'norm' - if you think that films relate to any sort of reality, you're in a lot of trouble.

StarSparkle

I'm a bloke :o :o :o I've been called a sadcake and now a woman :o

I did say that when referring to American Pie that it was 'only a film', but how can you say that similar things don't happen in real life - if you would care to read my posts I mentioned that one of my mates had been subject to bullying and humiliation in public due to the fact he was a virgin. How is that fantasy???

Have you ever heard of films based on a true story?? Obviously not

Originally posted by StarSparkle
But you were using the fact that young men love to 'big themselves up' in public to try to legitimise your opinion that sleeping around with all and sundry is the 'norm' today.


No I wasn't.

And how would the fact then men love to "big themselves up" legitimise my opinion anyway ?

I don't understand what your on about.

teenage sex is common, unless the problems of teen pregnancy etc... have all been made up.

Personally I don't think the number of sexual partners is in any way related to respect. First of all, unless you discuss it (and are honest) then no one has any way to know for sure how many it is.

And as to whether it's discussed in the pub, sex in general is a topic sometimes with my friends, but no specifics and rarely anything about how experienced someone is or is not.

Well well, sexual activities/preferences is always an emotive topic, but some of the posts on this thread have still made for interesting reading. What funny/blinkered views some people have.

In my opinion sex is a very personal thing, and it should fall to each individual to set their own guidlines on who they sleep with, how often, how frequently, how many partners and such. What right have any of us got to pass comment/judgement on another's sex life? The only thing we have a right to be concerned about is whether they are being safe or not, because as tax payers this affects us. But if someone practices safe sex then quite frankly I don't care whether they've had one partner or 100 partners. IT'S THEIR LIFE AND THEIR CHOICE.

I don't think the generation arguement that has been used on this thread is water-tight either. Isn't the older and supposedly more restrained generation the same generation who introduced the world to swinging parties and wife swapping? Putting your car keys in a bowl at the end of a dinner party and seeing who goes home with who...?

And equally, the younger generation are the generation that are currently pionerring the True Love Waits campaign to encourage teens to wait until they are married before becoming sexually active.

It strikes me that there's absolutely no point in trying to judge someone on their sexual preferences, because your conclusions will almost always be wildly inaccurate.

Personally I don't normally carry condoms because I don't have one night stands. I don't have a problem with other people enjoying one night stands, but it's not something that appeals to me personally.

However if I was dating somebody and I thought sex might be on the cards, even if it was just a remote possibility, then I would carry a condom. Not with the intention of humping them over the bonnet of my KA in an NCP carpark :loopy: , but because if I went back to his place I wouldn't want to get caught short. I'd also rather use my own because I tend to buy the 'extra safe' ones, and I also know how long they've been sitting in the cupboard.

I tend to look at it this way - even if you're pretty sure that your evening won't conclude with sex, if you've done your 'body jobs' like tidying your legs, bikini line and such (the girls will know what I'm talking about), "just in case", then you should probably be carrying a condom "just in case".

As fo the lad who sparked this thread, I think he was being sensible. It's refreshing to hear of a young, sexually active male making sure he's fully prepared. So many men these days are more intent on trying to get away without wearing a condom, which I think is really sad. I wouldn't invite a man like that into my bed.

JBee - what a bloody fantastic reply...thank you!

Originally posted by Moon Maiden
JBee - what a bloody fantastic reply...thank you!

Wow! What a bloody fantastic response! Thanks Moon Maiden :P

Well said JBee :)

And I love your signature!

Originally posted by kathythebean
Well said JBee :)

And I love your signature!

Thanks! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

Originally posted by JBee
Thanks! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

Phew!! I love a good argument! Good job it was via the forum - there'd been blood drawn if it was done face to face, I'm sure! ;)

Think it died Ellybum cos we could not sort out the difference between having and imposing morals.

As for the origins of the thread - the subject I mean - its basically upto him whether he walks around with a wad of condoms or not.

The poster did ask for opinions and that is what she got - regardless of whether any idividual was right or wrong. That is what debate and discussion are all about.

Next interesting topic ....

Dragon

Originally posted by JonJParr
I'm not so sure that's true Nick. Look at the older generations of society [70+]; never was there an issue with the 'compatibility' factor of sex.

Beg pardon?!?!? Have you ever looked around you? Everything my grandparents told me about the morality of the (current) 70-year-olds was "there's a war on, get it while you can".

Originally posted by Cyclone
so you think that in reality people are mostly still virgins when they get married and have only one partner in their life? (As I imagine it used to be in say the victorian era).

Have you never read any history?

Yes, the self-repressed Victorian middle class may have ensured that at least their woman were virgins on marriage, and tried to enforce their values on the rest of the populace. A lot of the men certainly weren't, and in the "lower orders" it was a common way of life couple to just live together and possible go to the expense of getting married later.

I'm told there's a rural saying is along the lines of: "If you can't get her pregnant, why waste money on marrying her?"

Originally posted by transporter
producing a condom with the everything will be fine routine - is a way of forcing compliance.if the girl has refused because she isn't on the pill etc etc.
believe me it does happen - especially if they have gone back to one of the persons digs.

obviously keeping it hidden isn't - but i do think that both sides of this discussion are being a little blinkered in their opinions.

Oh, behave will you.

Are you seriously trying to say that a man with a condom or two in his pocket isn't being sensible at all but is in fact trying to coerce a woman into having sex?

Originally posted by Ousetunes
First word to come into my mind is 'desperate'.

Followed shortly after with 'least likely to'. Prepared? Maybe - and in today's morally bankrupt society that's no bad thing.

But the fact the 'guy' (boy?) wasn't hiding his 'collection' says it all.

It's probably a bit of a front and the lad's never had a ride in his life.

That's a great term for society today - "morally bankrupt". It encapsulates it so well.

Originally posted by Moon Maiden
Was with some friends last night and we got onto the subject of safe sex.

This was after - for what reason I don't know how exactly this came about - but one of the lads went into his wallet for something and was spotted with a rather impressive collection of condoms.

Now the first reaction out of the nearest girls mouth was "oh aren't you being a little optimistic" closely followed by "what are you some kind of gigolo". Perhaps a normal line of conversation in friendly company but it got us talking about gender roles in sex and how they are viewed and judged on certain things or actions.

So....what I wanted to know from you guys was what your instant reaction would be to seeing a guys wallet with such an impressive collection. What conclusion would you jump to about them? Would that conclusion be different if you were on your first date with them, or seeing a stranger in the supermarket?

Would you think them a slapper? Or be impressed for being so responsible?


Moon

I personally don;t carry condoms about as they tend to run passed there best before date :suspect:

if a guy has a wallet full of condoms then I'd think he is either a bit odd or myust get it all the time.

Moral Bankruptsy? what is this? it doesn't seem to effect many women I meet :D :suspect:

Originally posted by jgharston
Have you never read any history?

Yes, the self-repressed Victorian middle class may have ensured that at least their woman were virgins on marriage, and tried to enforce their values on the rest of the populace. A lot of the men certainly weren't, and in the "lower orders" it was a common way of life couple to just live together and possible go to the expense of getting married later.

I'm told there's a rural saying is along the lines of: "If you can't get her pregnant, why waste money on marrying her?"

those middle class victorian values have a lot to answer for with todays repressed views about sexuality.

Todays repressed sexual views??? Where?

Reckon how I think may have something to do with my age and how I was brought up, and my family were never prudes - though we did not go out of our way to talk about sex.

Just looking I see increased teenage pregnancies; increased STD's; increase in the number of people who just enjoy casual sex; breakdown in relationships; breakdown in marriage especially; and that's just the tip of the iceburg.

No-one is saying sex is dirty, seedy or wrong. At least - I do not think they are, but that's just my opinion. What seems to be in question is the apparent ease in which two people get togetherm have sex, and then move on to the next sexual encounter. Isn't that what animals do? And no - I am not saying people are behaving like animals.

That is a judgement of other peoples morals - just for you.

Personally - I do not give a monkeys rear end what other people do. I live by my own morals and my own guidelines. So far I have seen no good reason for changing them.

Dragon

if sex isn't seedy, dirty or wrong, then why shouldn't people get together for casual sex and then move on?
Why do you put increase in casual sex along with all those negative things if you don't think that it's a bad thing?

BTW - the incidence of teenage pregancy is steadily declining and has been at least since the 70's. The rate of decline is just slower in the UK than on the continent.

Do you really not know where there are any lines drawn and where something good can be turned into something not good?

It is the casual bit that in my opinion is wrong. As I said in my previous post - are we no more than animals when it comes to sex?

Sorry matey but for me - sex has to have more meaning than just a quick ten minutes in a passageway.

I personally do see casual sex as being wrong and that is why it is in the list. As I stated - that was me judging others by my standards - always a dangerous thing to do.

Wow! A decline in teenage pregnancies since the 70's? But an increase in the passing of STD's? I dunno the facts so will take your word on those.

My point is that if you are going to have sex with someone then it ought to mean something more than just adding another notch to your belt. Perhaps not - but that is my opinion.

Dragon

I don't know about STI's.

The details about teen pregancies were made quite strongly by someone a few months ago, they brought in statistics and the whole lot. It changed my opinion as before that I thought they'd been on the increase.

You keep associating casual with places like NCP carparks, and passegways, I'd guess that those are in the minority and most are back at peoples homes.

Originally posted by Cyclone


The details about teen pregancies were made quite strongly by someone a few months ago, they brought in statistics and the whole lot

How convincing. Was it a woman on a bus or a guy in a chip shop?

Originally posted by cloudybay
How convincing. Was it a woman on a bus or a guy in a chip shop?

it was someone on the forum :loopy:
go and look it up if you're interested rather than making pointless and meaningless comments.

Originally posted by Cyclone
it was someone on the forum :loopy:
go and look it up if you're interested rather than making pointless and meaningless comments.

ooooooh, getting a bit rattled, Cyclone?

Look like your views aren't QUITE as widely accepted in society as you thought.....

StarSparkle

It does not matter to me whether it is in a car park or behind the bike shed or even in a bedroom in a house.

Surely the thing is to get to know the person or to at least have feelings for them before you get to a stage where you are ready to become sexually involved.

There are always exceptions to every rule - before anyone says anything about that ;)

But generally, would it not be better to get to know the male or female, build up a relationship, and then to hit the sack - so to speak?

Without the bravado I am sure that many people who have participated in a one night stand feels lessened by the event. Just my assumption and opinion, of course.

As to the subject - yet again - what is the point in carrying an impressive collection of condoms around? Surely a couple or three would be much more indicative of a responsible person and of someone with some consideration and not just out either to attempt to impress or to 'lay' as many females as he can impress?

Dragon