Vanilla wife.

[bldoink]

I had hoped that it would be too "off topic" for the purposes of this forum. Perhaps I'm wrong but that would be unfortunate and would, IMHO, degrade the usefulness of this site. But don't worry, I'm sure the moderator will consider my opinion wrong.

[Masonjames]

Just my opinion but if man goes to the trouble and expense of getting an implant. It's for a reason. The reason is he is not ready to give up sex. a soft penis can serve you well for everything except sex.
Shouldn't this be a red flag to the woman? Why does she think he is getting help, if he isn't going to use this new found ability? The same question applies to the man also. Why do it if you're not going to use it with someone? That's just a waste of time and money not counting how many women would love a hard dick on their own man.

[oldbeek]

I got an implant for myself to feel like a man. Don't know why but I needed it.

[dg_moore]

I know it's fake but just wishing

How could this article on fellatio be a fake? Didn't you notice that the esteemed physician Dr. Lictepeen was cited?

[DaveKell]

I had hoped that it would be too "off topic" for the purposes of this forum. Perhaps I'm wrong but that would be unfortunate and would, IMHO, degrade the usefulness of this site. But don't worry, I'm sure the moderator will consider my opinion wrong.

It appears you want to have in internet forums what's known as pre-emptive editing. That being you set a ground rule for replies that they can't disagree with your viewpoint. Whether the moderator of this forum disagrees with you or not is of no consequence. Of course you are always free to start your own forum and impose any rules you see fit. As long as you are here it's advisable to go with the flow of this site's culture and not expect anybody to welcome the imposition of your will into discussions. Just a few facts, not intended as an attack.

[Lost Sheep]

I had hoped that it would be too "off topic" for the purposes of this forum. Perhaps I'm wrong but that would be unfortunate and would, IMHO, degrade the usefulness of this site. But don't worry, I'm sure the moderator will consider my opinion wrong.

It appears you want to have in internet forums what's known as pre-emptive editing. That being you set a ground rule for replies that they can't disagree with your viewpoint. Whether the moderator of this forum disagrees with you or not is of no consequence. Of course you are always free to start your own forum and impose any rules you see fit. As long as you are here it's advisable to go with the flow of this site's culture and not expect anybody to welcome the imposition of your will into discussions. Just a few facts, not intended as an attack.

Also known as "prior restraint".

Interesting question brought up by bldoink.

Let me recap:

On Sat Jan 19, 2019 10:54 am, Gruffhunter voiced an opinion that, while not exactly on-point in details, in its entirety expressed a philosophy that sheds light on the societal constructs that laid the groundwork for the original question.

This section of FrankTalk is titled, "Sexuality" and this thread began with a question about a wife withdrawing (or never participating in) as varied sexual activities as the husband desired. From there it wandered (not too far afield, I think) into (unilaterally decided) celibacy in marriage and what to do about it.

bldoink apparantly believes expressing that philosophy is so far "off topic" that it degrades the usefulness of the site. I suppose that the expression of any philosophy of life could be said to do the same. Even that philosophy expressed by bldoink.

Freedom is messy, sometimes irritating or painful. The alternatives, however, are (in MY philosophy) not better.

[bldoink]

Sheesh!
I'm not going to engage in a debate here but I do find it irresistible to make a comment. I'd intended to let Dave have the last word. Oh well!

I do not agree with Dave Kell's post. Yes, it did have a bit of the feel of an attack, but that's OK, I did my crying and I'm over it now. However, his post was also concise and clear and he's entitled to his opinion, as am I.

The post by sheep was very lost. It misrepresented the earlier posts, obscuring obvious meaning and content and appeared to "sanitize" some of them for what I assume was intended to shape interpretation. I will not further advocate my previously stated opinion. I think I was clear enough.
-------------------------------------------------------
Yes, I do think it's very possible to degrade the usefulness of the site with the content of posts. That's one reason many forums wither and die after initially blossoming. I suppose it could be part of the cycle of life. If this forum loses it value, or at least the value that appears intended in it's mission statement, I hope another springs up to fill the obvious need. No, I won't be starting such a site or forum. I'm not interested.

Yes, freedom is messy but there is no freedom guaranteed here other than what the owner, administrator and moderator of the site permit. No, the limits of that freedom are not dictated by me. I assure you I get that. However, at this point I don't think I've exceeded that permitted freedom of opinion, yet, at least not in this case. But I could be wrong.

Prior restraint, or whatever you want to call it is what makes civilized society civil or polite. It's always there and I expect it always will be. Of course the lines that define it can be both fuzzy and can move. I have my opinion on where they should be as does everyone. I expressed my opinion on where they were being crossed for the good of this forum. My opinion! I didn't expect universal agreement. Not even close. But there it is.

[Lost Sheep]

Sheesh!
I'm not going to engage in a debate here but I do find it irresistible to make a comment. I'd intended to let Dave have the last word. Oh well!

I do not agree with Dave Kell's post. Yes, it did have a bit of the feel of an attack, but that's OK, I did my crying and I'm over it now. However, his post was also concise and clear and he's entitled to his opinion, as am I.

The post by sheep was very lost. It misrepresented the earlier posts, obscuring obvious meaning and content and appeared to "sanitize" some of them for what I assume was intended to shape interpretation. I will not further advocate my previously stated opinion. I think I was clear enough.
-------------------------------------------------------
Yes, I do think it's very possible to degrade the usefulness of the site with the content of posts. That's one reason many forums wither and die after initially blossoming. I suppose it could be part of the cycle of life. If this forum loses it value, or at least the value that appears intended in it's mission statement, I hope another springs up to fill the obvious need. No, I won't be starting such a site or forum. I'm not interested.

Yes, freedom is messy but there is no freedom guaranteed here other than what the owner, administrator and moderator of the site permit. No, the limits of that freedom are not dictated by me. I assure you I get that. However, at this point I don't think I've exceeded that permitted freedom of opinion, yet, at least not in this case. But I could be wrong.

Prior restraint, or whatever you want to call it is what makes civilized society civil or polite. It's always there and I expect it always will be. Of course the lines that define it can be both fuzzy and can move. I have my opinion on where they should be as does everyone. I expressed my opinion on where they were being crossed for the good of this forum. My opinion! I didn't expect universal agreement. Not even close. But there it is.

Maybe I should make this a PM, but since my earlier post was public, an apology should be equally so.

I regret any misrepresentation of earlier posts I generated. That was not my intention. I may be hypersensitive or inadequately sensitive to several writers' intentions.

Yes, I agree completely that restraint is what makes societies civil. Even makes them possible.

bldoink, I thank you for pointing out where I need to be clearer. Where we disagree on limitations on subject matter, we do agree on the need for civility. Please forgive me my transgressions as sell as my shortcomings in clarity.

[Reggieman]

Now that is a Gentleman's response. A real lesson for us all in civility.

[David_R]

+ 1