Sexual Relationships 
Sexual Health 
This is my first myTake, so if I miss something or leave out anything pertinent, forgive me. I don't think it'll be particularly long.
I spend a lot of time on this site as some of you may have noticed; I think it's fascinating to regard peoples' different opinions on life, the universe, and everything in it (mostly sex, hormones, romantic aspirations, physical attraction, and all related matters), whether they have any logical or substantive reasons to think the things they do, or not.
Often in topics related to romance, specifically the questions written by a female perspective, I see examples similar to "Why is he doing X to me?" or "Why is he acting X way?" The question always seems to verge into the banal and ordinary at first with "Things have been going well" but (there's always a but), "but why is he suddenly acting X way like he doesn't like me any more?" And then, inevitably, as sure as the sun rises...
"...Is he just using me for sex?"
Now, this very, very rarely occurs with a guy talking about a girl in the same fashion in a comparable post. But in the *thousands of posts* I've viewed and commented on in my time on GaG, I've noticed it... four or five times? So this is indeed a girl-ranting-about-guy-behavior sexual topic, and THAT is something I notice every single day at least two or three times.
^ So why did I post that pic? Why an eye roll? Why is the concept of "using me for sex" or "using you for sex" or "using" ANYone for sex, to quote @Mllecake, "lowball ass-chatter?" Well here's why: You can't have your cake and eat it too. What is "using" someone for sex? Simple: We call it sexual assault. If it isn't sexual assault, there's no "using" taking place. If a girl willingly has sex with a guy, even several times, then she is doing it because she wants to; she cannot then later claim that the guy is using her or used her just because things don't go well, or she didn't get out of him *after the fact* something that she wanted from him. And if she doesn't want to have sex with him, then she shouldn't fucking have sex with him-- it's really very simple.
So what is desired, in these cases? Oftentimes, that something is a relationship. Monogamous commitment. Or perhaps even an engagement, if they've been together for a while. In reference to the "friend zone," which many girls pooh-pooh as an immature concept because it's not something they usually have to deal with, a paraphrased popular narrative is "A girl is not a person that you drop enough friend coins into and then eventually you are granted sex." And I agree-- that mostly makes sense, right? It's a heavy dilution of a sensitive topic for lots of guys, but succinctly summarized, it's pretty much true, yes? So then a guy is also not a person that you drop enough sex coins into and you are then eventually (or immediately) granted a relationship or "something more" or marriage or Come-meet-my-mom-and-all-my-friends.
A truth in this life is that everyone has the right to self-determination as long as you're not hurting someone else; a person is allowed to be sure of themselves, and *own* themselves, and their body is theirs and no one else's. No one has the right to rescind that (outside of imprisoning people for violent crimes or whatever). No one has the right to physically or violently violate your body, your wholeness, without significant cause. Your "body is a temple," for lack of a better phrase. This is a popular narrative in feminism, and it should be, because it's true. So then, people are capable of making their own decisions about their own bodies, yes? Including girls/ladies/females/women? Obviously yes? Since they're, you know, people? So then how can so many girls clearly make the decision to do with their bodies what they *choose* to do, and *want* to do, and then later hypocritically ask why, or claim that, the guy is using them for sex? Which is it? Which way do you want it?
The term "use" implies that a person is doing something with an object of some kind that they are in control of and the other thing isn't-- you use a hammer to drive in a nail. You use a car to get from point A to point B. You use sunglasses to shade your eyes. You use a girl to orgasm. ....One of those is not like the others. I'll let you guess: Which is it?
Sometimes, some girls make much pomp and circumstance about being objectified by guys, and how that's immoral... or something (even though other girls in equal numbers seem to actually enjoy being objectified/lusted after-- in a safe fashion of course-- judging by everything seen on GaG). How far are we going to take this drivel? What, if he really really enjoyed the sex then he used her? Or if he didn't, it was using? Or if she really liked it, it was using her? Or if she didn't like it that much, it was using her? Or something? Or if he didn't text her for two or three days after, it was "using?" He's a "player?" Please... spare us. It's nonsense. It's absurd. It's ridiculous.
This Take is also directed to all the guys (the sheeply plethora that I've seen, sadly) who stupidly push the same narrative in attempts to be supportive of the girls who make these posts. Examples include the same thing: "Yeah he sucks, he doesn't deserve you," "he sounds like an asshole," etc. Bro... *you* sound like a complete fool. I get WHY you are saying these things-- like I already said, you want to be supportive! Girl is upset-- back girl up! Make her feel better! Give her an online hug! Come to her rescue! There's nothing wrong with that, right? Supporting others, being sympathetic, is a good thing in the big scheme of life. Unless of course... the cause you're supporting is a foolish, illogical one.
This is very, very, very simple: If she wants to have sex with the dude, then fine. If she doesn't, she doesn't. She can't then basically get buyer's remorse for not getting a label or a ring. I mean, she CAN, but then that makes her exactly one thing-- a hypocrite.
And once you've become a hypocrite, your opinion is worthless. You lose.
What Girls & Guys Said
36 34Nice baby
Oohhhooohh
Great take
Men "use" women for sex and women "use" men for attention, affection and money (sorry ladies, but as long as you insist on men doing the asking out and paying for dates, you are every bit as "guilty" as anyone else).
If you think about it... I mean really think about it objectively, the concept of using someone is nothing more than trying to get your needs met, and men and women generally just have different needs, or at least they prioritize those needs differently. But for some unknown reason, women seem to think their own needs are more legitimate than men's. It's an archaic mindset that needs to die, but it's taking too damned long.
Unless you think both those things are true, then neither of them are. I don't think the concept of "using" exists in the sense that people say it. If I give a girl attention and affection, it's because I *want* to do it. I hope for something in return, but she doesn't HAVE to do anything or whatever. That's up to her. Likewise, if I have sex with a girl, I don't HAVE to start thinking about how she would look in a wedding dress. That's ridiculous. I can if I want to-- I don't owe her that. It's not about owing.
I hope you realize you just agreed with me.
Uh... nope, not so sure about that, but, hey whatever you say.
I think we are on the same page, although I probably didn't do a very good job of making my point. I don't believe the concept of using exists in this sense either, which is why I put "use" in quotes. The point I was trying to make is that it is silly to say men use women but and not also say that women use men. In other words, exactly what you said in your first sentence below.
Ah I see. Fair enough.
Practically saying like putting all things aside. Girls needs are better than men they need stability, home, kids. everything we need to keep human race going. Men need sex and beautiful women that's only going to help very little in world. I mean if we kill all men in the world. Leaving maybe 5000 or something for each country humanity will survive with ease, specially with banks now a days. I don't think same can be said for women. Any way I don't hate men to do that. I even feel them more good to women than women to them sometime but to answer your question there needs are better than you. scientifically speaking
@adoriakim First of all, procreation aside, women would never be able to survive on this planet without all the things men do to make the planet livable. If we killed all men, as you suggested, women would all die in a matter of months, or possibly a year of so, because every link in the chain of events that play out every day to keep this world tuning, so to speak, is supported by men. Let's just look at one small example... fossil fuels and what they do to support every facet of your life, from the products you use, the food you eat, the clothes you wear, the medicine you take, the car you drive... EVERYTHING you use on a daily basis is made possible and delivered to you by fossil fuels. That entire process would collapse without men to do all the work to maintain it... from operating the oil rigs where the oil is sourced, to operating the giant oil tanker ships that transport the oil to refineries, to operating those refineries, to delivering the fuel to the end users.
@adoriakim That doesn't even begin to address things like designing, building, maintaining and operating all the vehicles that deliver everything to you... cars, trucks, trains, planes... and the infrastructure of roads, highways and bridges that make that possible. It is incredibly naive t think would would be just fine on this planet without men, and incredibly arrogant to think women's needs are somehow more important than men's. Your comments here are utter nonsense, and a great example of the sexism of modern women.
So if someone told me "I need $1000 for hospital bills" and I willingly gave them the money but later found out the person lied and had never even been to the hospital; according to you, I was not used because I gave them the money from my own volition and free will.
Right.
Said the player.
... So, the problem with this comparison here is that it's really, really stupid. That's all.
A really, really stupid comparison to fit an even more stupid mytake. Given that you're the one on here trying to convince people that the notion of "being used" do not apply to people. Some people would do anything for money or sex, so cases like this take place often enough. People supplying their credit card information to some random person who contacted them online it's not less bizarre than sleeping with someone thinking it's forever love. Whether the person falling for it should know better, felt good along the way or even acted greedy themselves is sort of irrelevant when the main issue is that there was someone there acting in bad faith to begin with.
Comparisons are always apt when you're trying to make your point, but paying a bill and having sex with someone aren't the same thing. We're talking about normal sexual relations, not prostitution. Your comparison would have been more appropriate in a conversation about that topic, not this one. So, again, it's a stupid comparison. Sorry.
Basically you don't have the mental ability of making comparisons outside the scope of a narrow topic and assume people who do are wrong. Whatever, it's cool.
Lol. Basically.
Spot on 👏👏
Yes they do this is all BS.
Are you going to actually present logical or reasonable counterpoints? Or are you just going to say "You're incorrect" without anything to back you up? Don't just waste space.
Still waiting.
Women should be grateful an attractive man had sex with them. They're being selfish wanting more.
I agree
Definitely not my point man. No offense.