German FKK Clubs - Lounge and chat area

[Pistons]

I agree with Polyamorist here. His stance is backed pretty well by anthropological theory. There was also a leaked document from CIA in the 70's, referred to in several books, claiming that the reason women got the power to vote, and the push for feminism was approved, was to sex starve men in order to make men work harder.

Call it a conspiracy theory if you want. I call it logic. And a bit of machiavellianism.

[Pistons]

I never said that. I said sexual preference is not a choice. If it's 100% caused by genetics, it's not a choice. If it's 100% caused by environment, it's not a choice. And if it's a combination, it's not a choice.

And if Greece had a "gyness (sic) culture" it was only possible because there was attraction.

So now you are contradicting yourself. Which do you believe, that sexual orientation can or cannot be a matter of choice? You were opposed to the notion that orientation is not a choice. I. e. You were arguing in favor of orientation being a choice. Now you are saying that, essentially, nothing is a choice.

Make up your mind.

1. Post #12834:

I am for example sometimes lazy with my spelling, especially outside of work when I write on a phone. Because I just type fast and don't mind with spellchecking too much. It looks incredibly unprofessional you might say.

Here are two opposite takes on how to look at misspellings:

https://www.inc.com/peter-economy/17...fessional.html

https://gizmodo.com/study-people-who...rks-1767969516

So basically, a misspelling is claimed to seem unprofessional. This has gone so far as that nobody would object to it. And not strangely so due to how school teachers grade you on your spelling. But also, if you believe in that, science claims you are also a jerk. Since even if you don't always point it out, you may think so without saying it.

[Deleted by Admin]

2. I never wrote it was a choice either. Simply due to choice being an illusion (read: determinism). Something I referred to over 5 times in the last discussion in this thread too. Just 1-2 weeks ago.

I just reread all my posts here, and I definitely never did write anyone chooses anything. Please quote me on that. And don't edit a quote if you want to continue with your fake news. This was an assumption you made. And I suspect it was due to you not understanding what determinism really is.

3. I was arguing in favor of you wasting my bandwidth. Nothing else. Because you don't seem to want to read. You just seem to want to assume.

[Pistons]

So you object to feminism because men can't have 20 orgasms a day? This is why society should oppress women and deny them equal rights under the law and in social practice?

What's next, because black men have (slightly) longer penises, they should also be oppressed by white men?

Do you even know what feminism means?

Can you please stop wasting my bandwidth with useless assumption regarding things I have never uttered? Take your fake news elsewhere.

[XXL]

Cui bono? Big employers.

Here is a reminder of Maslow's hierarchy of needs:

https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki...y_of_Needs.svg....

Food is at the base of the pyramid, but so is sex. What happens if there is a constant sexual deficit as with many young American males? ...

Eerh no, sex is not at the base of the Maslow pyramid. More like at the upper middle it seems.

Making big employers the primary winners is just a re-serving of marxist conspiracy theories. Women are the winners. Women will stop trading sex for resources as soon as they can get one tenth of the same resources through other means.

That's why in Today's world we now have cities of 15 to 20 millions with hardly any opportunity for a non wealthy straight man to get laid. Very sad and not at all what we would have predicted some 40 years ago when cheap air travel put sex travel within reach of the average man.

[Nick The G]

Here is a reminder of Maslow's hierarchy of needs:....

Well, here is a reminder of a later form of Maslow's hierarchy of needs (revised model dating from 1970), some of the levels are not indicated in the english version of Wikipedia:

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:...ach_Maslow.png

Abraham Maslow died 1970. From 1980 on until nowadays, Ken Wilber has developed his "integral theory" model which is far more complex and differentiated. Again, (only) in the german version of wikipedia, there is a summary table showing different levels indicating human development under different perspectives (section "Theorie der Ebenen"). One of the columns in this table (far left) is the Maslow hierarchy.

Human beings are for sure a bit more complex than Maslows model, suited mainly for the western societies.

[Polyamorist]

Why on earth is anyone against this in mostly well regulated societies done openly and with the full enthusiastic consent and entrepreneurial girls trying to attract customers in a meritocracy? Who wants to consign us to barren Savannah with no food to starve?

Cui bono? Big employers.

The 19th century "They'll work harder if they're hungry" evolved to the 20th century "They'll work harder if they're not screwing all the time and smoking weed. " America in particular is like a big experiment in sex deprivation. And in a way this is effective: people work longer hours than in other countries. The problem is most of this by now is just makework. And soon robots (like self-driving trucks) will take the last real jobs.

Here is a reminder of Maslow's hierarchy of needs:

https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki...y_of_Needs.svg

The idea is that you can't progress to the higher needs until you have first satisfied the basic ones. For instance if you are suffering from a toothache you won't be obsessing about gaining respect from your fellow professionals.

Food is at the base of the pyramid, but so is sex. What happens if there is a constant sexual deficit as with many young American males? The danger is that the individual remains fixed at a pre teen level of psychosexual development (Freud's latency period).

Women do not have such a problem finding sex in the US and so they can move on and develop a higher Emotional Intelligence than men -- sadly they will often use this in a manipulative way!

People who suffer a sexual gap need to fill that somehow. The need is not always going to be sublimated in a productive way. At a time of unprecedented wealth, suicides and drug overdoses are at a record high in the US. Even life expectancy has started to decline.

Meanwhile those of us guys who have finally closed the gap in the FKK world should not view this as a final shore but a base on which to continue our psychosocial development -- climbing Maslow's pyramid.

Since I am not a credentialed psychologist, some people on this thread will follow a pattern of saying I have no right to comment on these matters where "experts" from the American Psychological Association have already determined scientific truth. Well, what has the APA been up to recently?

https://medium.com/gender-studies-fo...s-a37a1ef9c0ab

So much for "science". It sounds like the organization has been taken over by Nurse Ratched types. This is an example of how the sexual dysfunction at the base of the Western individual's mind is paralleled by a dysfunction in the shared pool of knowledge: a poison of myriad fallacies circulating up through science, education, the Internet, etc. And so we must fall back on our own personal experiences to know the real truth.

"The wise man speaks of what he sees, the idiot of what he hears. " -- Old Arab saying.

[Mr Ho]

The idea is that men cannot have something not also women would have the same access to. And given girls can have sex 20 times a day, and men over time perhaps only can have sex 3 times a day (dick will go soft, and on ugly women even softer), biology makes this trade so extremely much harder to replicate in a feminist society that wants everything the same as men.

Wait till the science kicks in, I am sure soon or later men will be able to have sex 20 times per day with no problem with stronger orgasms LOL!

[Neurosynth]

The idea is that men cannot have something not also women would have the same access to. And given girls can have sex 20 times a day, and men over time perhaps only can have sex 3 times a day (dick will go soft, and on ugly women even softer), biology makes this trade so extremely much harder to replicate in a feminist society that wants everything the same as men.

So you object to feminism because men can't have 20 orgasms a day? This is why society should oppress women and deny them equal rights under the law and in social practice?

What's next, because black men have (slightly) longer penises, they should also be oppressed by white men?

Do you even know what feminism means?

[Neurosynth]

While Neurosynth has a problem since he considers genetics to be 100% at fault, and nothing else. Then boxes people into groups. This approach can 100% not answer the fact that ancient greeks had their gyness culture. And I suppose that is why Neurosynth also avoids this part of the discussion.

I never said that. I said sexual preference is not a choice. If it's 100% caused by genetics, it's not a choice. If it's 100% caused by environment, it's not a choice. And if it's a combination, it's not a choice.

And if Greece had a "gyness (sic) culture" it was only possible because there was attraction.

1. Problem is Neurosynth bases his entire criticism of my initial story on the assumption that there is something known as free will and choice. I never said that. So the entire discussion is completely flawed and seems to be based on false grounds. Determinism doesn't allow for free will or choice.
. . .

So now you are contradicting yourself. Which do you believe, that sexual orientation can or cannot be a matter of choice? You were opposed to the notion that orientation is not a choice. I. e. You were arguing in favor of orientation being a choice. Now you are saying that, essentially, nothing is a choice.

Make up your mind.

[Neurosynth]

...

Look, I also posted what the American Psychological Association has to say on this. (They say sexual preference isn't a choice. And even if preference changes, it's not a choice.).

That's pretty much how I would define choice. As Sartre said, L'homme est condamne etre libre.

...

Changing one's sexual preference towards men would mean that at some point one found men not-attractive, but wished one could find them attractive, and then from there *somehow* attraction would develop.

If one wants to stumble towards the intellectual tar pit that is the question of free will, that's always possible. And not terribly pragmatic.

In all other matters we don't assume that just because something changes it is because it was willed to change. Objects fall because of gravity, but that doesn't mean the objects "wanted" to fall. There is something similar here. Some combination of factors will cause a person to change in sexual preference. That doesn't mean the change was willed. Choice is not simply being there when a change happens. It's only choice when it has causal force.

[CaneUppHosAss]

Hello Sir,

A lot of frustration, dejection and angst. While predictable, I would recommend to tone down the hyperbole. It is not uncommon to have these high profile examples making busts once a decade or so. But the debate has shifted a long time ago in the US. Most people recognize the invasion of privacy, the abuse heaped on a rich but private citizen who is widowed and not even technically cheating. In the end, this will make very limited dent in any practical matter. Knowledgeable mongers have survived and done well for themselves in the US and yes believe it or not, fucking goes on in the US. If the Kraft story is used as a pretext to simply heap scorn on the US in forums like this, so be it but the reality is not as bad as what's sometimes portrayed in angst ridden comments.

[Smoke Light]

I am not sure what gets in the heads of people who criminalise a basic, essential human act: sex being the very cause of our existence and purpose to reproduce and source of joy to so many. It just creeps me out thinking of some cop. On our dime. In a grey cubicle poring over this and laughs at the station.

An utter disrespect to people's privacy for "justified" causes is a new norm. A frustration for people with basic decency, joy for shameless feminists.

What gets in the heads of people who criminalize our hobby? Majority of women lacking love for sex equate prostitution with spreading HIV and other horrible disease. Therefore, every prostitute working in such "despicable" conditions must be a forced worker. No human being can do this by via consensual choice. Of course every sex worker is a victim of trafficking. Plus all money earned by poor victims goes to the pimps anyways by definition. Applause! USA, USA.

[Smoke Light]

We are not in disagreement. There is evidence that genetics contribute to eventual sexual preference, but there is also evidence that environment has some influence.

But the nature / nurture issue isn't particularly relevant to the issue at hand, that being whether one can will their sexual preference to change. I know of no scientific evidence for willing a change in sexual preference, and any number of authorities agree.

Again, not that you are disagreeing with this.

I am a member of my gym for 20+ years. Back in time in the men's shower room there were no stalls, everybody showered in the open. In about 2005 the operator installed the stalls with closed doors. Only few people used them first couple of years at times like early mornings when showers were crowded. Nowadays it changed to the exact opposite, most new club members and most younger guys go to the stalls to shower and do it in and out neatly wrapped in a towel.

[Pistons]

Why on earth is anyone against this in mostly well regulated societies done openly and with the full enthusiastic consent and entrepreneurial girls trying to attract customers in a meritocracy? Who wants to consign us to barren Savannah with no food to starve?

The idea is that men cannot have something not also women would have the same access to. And given girls can have sex 20 times a day, and men over time perhaps only can have sex 3 times a day (dick will go soft, and on ugly women even softer), biology makes this trade so extremely much harder to replicate in a feminist society that wants everything the same as men.

[Mr Ho]

Yes Mr Ho.

The discovery of FKKs about a decade ago and long before that Thailand was amazing. I am always amazed at the smiles and camaraderie of the men in these places who enjoy but don't make a full time existence out of it and have a real life. I doubt war would be possible with enough pretty and willing girls, booze, food and pleasure. Beautiful women throwing themselves at us. We are like satiated lions at a banquet of gazelles or wild game and endless hunting on fertile fields.

Everytime I arrive back it is like being a child discovering fun again. I expect many readers here are the same. It's why we hang out here. Seeking joy in life as is the natural imperative and point of it all. And yes, some billionaires miss the boat like everybody else who does not shop around widely and go for it when opportunity knocks..

Yes, you are right, right after good sex with beautiful women, the last thing men want is to fight or be aggressive.

FKK format is the good example of German liberalism and their good organizational culture admitting that even you forbid prostitution, it just go underground and make society worst, so let organize it and regulate it on proper format such as FKK as we see today. Happy us mongers LOL!

Once upon a time, sex with beautiful girls one after another was limited and access was granted with rather tough conditions, one of that is marriage etc. , but now it is no longer like that and some men like us who are willing to go extra mile to discover are now liberated with such restriction, it is sex on demand that we can choose.

I can see feminist going against that, but only thing I can say to them is that, do not hate the players, hate the game LOL!

We live in lucky era, so it is wise to put old mentality aside when it comes to this and enjoy young beauties that are waiting for us to fuck them for moderate costs. After all, all we get out of this life is good memories. So let us collect that in many formats and one of that is fucking beautiful girls one after another.

As you say, fucking beautiful girls for masculine men are like hope in life that one can never get bored of. I calm down a lot, but still as you said, I got drive also before entering FKK on first day of trip straight from airport to FKK because once I change and walk into main bar of FKK, new guaranteed encounters are there waiting for me. It is like we arrange new fateful sexual meeting that only happen few times in life over and over again ourselves by going there.

I monger here in Tokyo too mostly beautiful Eurasian girls, which is good, but German FKK is good for me for white girls and also thanks to German liberal immigration policies that I also enjoy fucking many beauties from all different nations to serve my lust for exotic beauties who are often half German white and half something else like Arab, Iranian etc. We are lucky to live in this era.