Category: Dating and Relationships
What do you think of couples who are just making out all day, kissing more than they talk? Or about the couples who are embracing more like they were making love with garments? Oh, heavens!
I think they are easy to ignore most of the time. In the instances that they are not easy to ignore, I am more offended by their proximity than their activity. Why do you find it so taxing to have people kissing or embracing in your vicinity?
It depends on the environment, but I'm assuming you are talking about the couples who make out in public and stand in the way so everyone has to walk around them to get where they are going. It can be annoying, but life is full of those inconveniences that you have to take with a grain of salt and keep doing your own thing.
@Post1, move to Afghanistan, you can have all the anti-public-affection rules you want over there. If that's the society you want, it's made to order for you. Go east, young man, go east.
thank you leo. there's nothing wrong with PDA. what I do have a problem with, though, is people judging others in a negative light just cause they're uncomfortable with whatever said thing happens to be.
This was a question opened to opinions, if one doesn't like another's please bite your tongue and don't tell anyone what to do
But opinions is what you got. In other words, it was open to opinions of people who agree?
In my view, there's nothing wrong with it.
I think it's for those who agree and disagree, so it's a question of weather one knows how to comunicate without being mean, that's all
But you can't tell other people what to do either. Lol. It's contradictory. And some people are more blunt than others, so if you interpret it as being mean than that's on you.
I don't got a problem with public display. Although I wouldn't go far out but just a quick kiss maybe in public. I much rather do these things in private. But this is just me.
One matter is being blunt and another is being rude, no I am not telling others what to do, I am only suggesting, you don't always have to be right.
if you don't like the way some opinions are presented, maybe you shouldn't post to forums like this where there are such diverse people.
If I didn't think I was right, I wouldn't have said anything. And you've been asked questions, maybe you could answer a few of those and defend your view, rather than wasting a bunch of time whining about how we're not playing nice.
yes, that, too.
Dolce.Eleganza: Of all people on here you come off as quite opinionated about things. Presumably because you believe you're right. Like Cody said, back it up if you want. Most people think they're right about some things, unless we say that there are more questions than answers, or that we basically don't know. You didn't point out who you were talking about, maybe a few of us.
So, I'll speak for myself: The Afghanistan comment? Yep, I stand firmly behind that one, kid. The societies that have the hardest time with what they now call PDA are the same societies blowing up buildings and using improvised explosive devices on people. Is that just a random fact? Like everyone getting in a car accident last week happened to eat carrots? I don't think so: people who are heavily invested in controlling others' enjoyment or however you want to call it, tend to have a rather insane disposition for power and control over other people. That isn't to say that you do: far be it from me to say that. But this particular thinking does attract people like that. You're likely to attract the likes of the Westboro Baptists, friends and sympathizers of those who blew up the towers on 9/11, and other similar unsavories which I would guess are not characters you'd be interested in. Over the decades, I have grown too hate things that are used to control people like this, and the sources I mentioned above are precisely that. When Al Qaeda took over Afghanistan in the 1980s, public display of affection was the first social control to be instituted. After that you usually get enforced religion or dogma, enforced curfews, women having rights compromised or eliminated entirely, and the like. Better to avoid the whole trashheap and, if a bit of spooning it up makes you so upset, just look the other way and be done with it.
Being a discrete type of person, I believe there's a time and place for everything...!
To me, kissing, hugging and holding hands are fine, but groping and intimate touchings should be reserved for private places. I just think certain form of affections are sacred, and should only be shared between 2 lovers without public's prying eyes...
If other people are ok with having an audience, then all the power to them...
Well, as long as when I'm on a bus or train they aren't kissing each other over me when I'm in the middle seat, I say love and be loved.
I honestly think its sweet.
Like Mini, I'm not going to be unbuttoning her shirt or clothes in public, but holding her close, kissing her, touching her, I'm en. I personally enjoy it and if a person is shy to sho some PDA in public I wonder why.
They had a saying on my block. "If you can't be seen with her in public, you shouldn't have her in private."
But there's such a thing as showing the girl your respect Wayne. What I mean is, if you're groping her and slobbering all over her like a piece of meat, then that's no longer sweet in my humble opinion.
But then again, I'm probably old fashion this way.
I'm much more touched by a couple hugging each other or holding eachother's hands with a quick loving kiss then watching them going at it like 2 porn stars, :P
I totally agree with Kim on this one....
Well, I'll confess, I don't slobber, or such things iin public either. I do understand the point. Lol
I again don't want me in the middle of it either. They might slobber on my phone while I'm trying to listen to the music and I'll have to wipe it off on her shirt. Might cause a fight right? I mean, her lover could think I'm trying to move in on her right?
I am personally outraged that people spend money on each other in public! A quick dime here or there, but one's hard work and effort is sacred! Why should someone openly purchase that $5000 ring for her, or that expensive toy for him? Oh, and isn't it treating the payer like a piece of leather, aka a wallet, then, since if someone passes a certain threshold of affection they're treating her like a piece of meat? Ah, and since many of us, myself included, tend to treat words certain people say as very precious, then perhaps no compliments in public either? Hmm. Lock all we deem precious in a vault? It's all ridiculous, I say.
All jokes aside. How much time do you realy spend looking at people showing PDA?
Now if you are blind you really have to kind of seek it out, but if you are visual you have the option not to stare? Smile. If you don't look it won't bother you any.
there's nothin wrong with a little effection. But i think, the couple also need to respect others, respect the public space, and also other space. For example, recently, i was in a class with a lesbian couple. The only thing they seems to be interested is making out, kissing, and all that stuff. It is not only disrespectful for the lecturer/facilitator, it is also distracting the class to no end.
On another hand, if you are on a date, at a dinner table, and there're some other people around you, but not on your table, who cares, right?
if I'm into someone and they're into me, I'm gonna display that publicly. if I'm horny as hell and wanna be fucked, it's my right to carry that out. of course I'd be mindful of laws that exist, and no kids being around, but really, it's not society's right to dictate what I do. you'll openly eat some kind of food others don't like, but not show affection towards your partner? makes no sense to me.
It depends; I don't really see anything wrong with holding hands, hugging and kissing in public, but I also don't want an audience watching what we do.
why not? if you're really into the person, do you seriously think you'll stop to consider the eyes that may or may not be watching? I sure wouldn't, but clearly, most people are old fashioned here.
There's nothing wrong with being old fashion about certain things... It takes all kind to build our society!
And, the measure of the love I have for my partner does not base on whether or not I choose to fuck him publically!
If 2 people are comfortable and secure within their love for each other, displaying affection publically or not doesn't change anything.
If you want to come across as a display for others to see, that's your choice. I'd rather keep my business and my spouse's at just that. I'm no porn star, and I don't plan to be one, certified or not. If you want to, have fun.
In response to the original post, all I can say is, meh, why should I care?
Yes, but to Kimi and others talking up the old-fashioned values, let's do this thing: if it's a secret, you're ashamed of it, period. I don't particularly like or care for being the object of somebody's shame, even and especially if that shame is cast in some sort of angel of light of prudishness. Now, I am not exactly all over the partner in public, but consider this. People are open about criticism. People are open about expressing dislikes. People are open about expressing material possession of things. And these are nearly always the same shame-based control manipulators who want to make sure their partner knows they're some kind of disease to be ashamed of in public. The shoe is on the other foot, now.
I don't find anything wrong with people who want to do things to each other in public. Me personally, however, I am really shy about even kissing in public. I don't mind holding hands, or hugging, but I honestly feel that anything after that point is too much, and while I don't mind if others do it, I certainly wouldn't want to be seen or caught doing something of that nature.
Wow… since when does not wanting to be all over in public meant that I see my partner as a disease, and worse still, that I’m ashamed of him?
Trust you me, I’ve never left my partner in any doubt as to my love toward him be it public or private… There are ways of showing public affection however, without behaving like 2 pornstars
A loving hug, a gentle kiss on the lips, the holding of hands, the arms around one another’s shoulders … I think you’ve gotthe the jest .
If not wanting to trash around like 2 eels glued by the lips and hips make me a prude then yes, I ‘m, and happily so. The only person I’m willing to show my slutty side to is my partner and only within the sanctety of our private space.
And since when did displaying public affection to the point of making others feeling uncomfortable equates to not Treating your partner like he has some kind of a disease or that you are not ashamed of him? I fail to see the equation… Just because one is sexually open and does not care to reserve it for only the home, it does not make her better or worse then the rest of us whom chooses to be modest.
I agree with the last post completely. Very well said. I'm not going to make a scene if other people want to grope each other in public, or go even farther than that. I'll probably turn and walk discreetly away. However, I personally don't feel any need to go beyond kissing in public. If you feel you have something to prove to others, or you want to be seen and noticed that much, go ahead, fuck in public. I really don't care, but that's not my style.
agreed with the last 2 posters.
I thought public affection was only the occasion hug or kiss. And I doubt people go all over each other would, I dono, get arrested for public exposure? I was only referring to the normal stuff,
So if I'm wrong, and you really meant public mating, I would stand corrected. However, more often than not, extreme examples are given, however unrealistic, to elicit support from the sheople and criminalize others; not unlike the way the fundies oversexualize the gays or PETA makes gross accusations against service dog handlers. So as often happens, lets have it: why is affection offensive, but not public display of other things, like material wealth, or public display of dislike? Or anything else that we accept? Barring the stuff you mention which if it does happen, probably would result in an arrest for public exposure.
thank you, leo. you seem to be the only one here who understands where I'm coming from. I never said there was anything wrong with being old fashioned, or that I'd fuck in public like a porn star. I was simply advocating individual freedom, and rights. if that brands me as something negative in the eyes of others, so be it. I'm proud to be open, and I know I'm not alone in feeling as I do.
I should have ellaborated on what is appropriate for people to see, my bad.
Ok, first off, whom here has ever said that showing one's affection toward our partner in public is offensive? If you've read my previous posts with a minimum of attention, you could hardly fail to notice that I've stated on more than one occasion that I'm perfectly ok with that to a certain degree...! I've use several examples of what I deem are appropriate and acceptible to me, so I'm not going to waste my valuable time and repeat yet again.
Secondly, to quote Chelsea "if I'm into someone and they're into me, I'm gonna display that publicly. if I'm horny as hell and wanna be fucked, it's my right to carry that out." How should one go about interpreting such a statement? To me, and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, I take it to mean that if you and your partner are in the mood to screw each other in public, you'd do just so with the exception of not crossing the limits stated by the law, and not within the proximity of children. It also says to me that you are comfortable being sexually open. There's nothing wrong with being secure with one's sexuality, and is opened about it...On the otherhand, there's also nothing wrong with those whom have chosen not to flaunt their goods for all to see either because they're not as comfortable being that forward, or they prefer to be discrete while in public.
how should you interpret such a statement? exactly as you did, which is that I embrace every part of me, and will freely express that. there's no other way to interpret it, unless you're intimidated by me, have tons of hangups about sex, or are ashamed of showing affection to your partner, as leo said.
I also assumed PDA meant what was legal by law, and not outright sex in public.
Now, I have had sex in a extremely public place, on the beach, people walking around, however, it was at night and under a blanket. I suppose the wise knew exactly what was going on, but their were no children around, and it was dark, and you'd have to have gotten close and inspected it to see. Not legal. In a public bathroom, at one of these nice hotels, again not legal, and public, because you had to go in together. Their was a lock on the door, but still.
In the day light, on 5th avenue, I'm not having sex. Lol, but have no issue with PDA, legal PDA.
I also have had sex in an adult setting, and that might be called public. A group of friends, we had no problem with having sex with our partners anyplace in the house at any time. No one bothered about being quiet either. It was open.
That, I really have no issue with at all.
Uncle Leo, i think the public affection hthat the first poster, and most posters of this topic meant more than just hugging and kissing and that. I think, it meant the whole journey of making out in public and that. I'm not sure about the idea of public affection = hugging and kissing, i think thats pretty much gone out of the window on the 2000s.
As i said on my early post, i agree on little public affection e.g. kissing, hugging, holding hands and that, but i think, what should be private should remains private. Can call me old-fashion, can call me traditional, but i think, thats still that is soething that i'll keep to myself and my love one in private. If, he can't wait for that bit of privacy and intermacy, then, perhaps, he can go to find the next girl, and make out with her in public?
wait a minute. I don't have any sexual hangups and I'm not ashamed of my partner at all. So just because I don't feel the need to be all over him like a cheap suit on a subway or a bus or in a cab, does that mean I'm wrong or worse somehow? I won't refrain from a hug or some light expression of affection here and there if my mood strikes me, but I don't feel the need to take off my clothes or sit on his lap ooooooooor spread my legs and have him grope me while everyone's either watching or trying to discretely avoid us...Does that make me a prude? dont' think so. It doesnt' make me any less sexual than someone who'll drop their pants at the drop of a hint of horniness. it just shows that it's not my style to engage in intense public displays of affection. So what? I'm not keen on causing a sceen. I also dont' need to prove to my man that I love him by hanging off of him like an ornament at a christmas tree display when we're out with friends or just in general. There's a time and place for things, as some have said. subtlety is just as sexy sometimes.
If you feel like taking a piss while at a restaurant, for instance, will you pull down your pants and piss under the table into a cup, for instance, just because your uninhibited, or will you haul your ass to the bathroom and do your business there?
I think you'll haul your ass to the bathroom, but if you won't, I'll be wondering why I came to dinner with you in the first place. lol
Leo I think you underestimate the degree to which people insist on showing their affection to each other in public. Talk to your daughter about what she sees at parties and at school, for instance. Just for kicks, she might tell you what today's teens are up to. And then maybe you won't say that people who hesitate to be all over each other in public are somehow ashamed of each other.
There's nothing wrong with being discrete. I'll hold my partner's hand, hug him, dance with him in public, show him I care with a smile or a kiss now and then, but you wont' see me doing the bump and grind on him while we're sitting in the front row of a bus, because I dont' get anything out of it. Simple as that.
If I ever want to join the mile high club, I'm not saying I wont' do it because it's wrong. I'll find a discrete area in which to partake in such an activity, so as not to disturb the smooth sailing, or rather flying of others. A little bit of discression goes a long way where class is concerned. point taken?
Amen, Burnadetta. If people want to do their public displays of affection than fine, so be it. do it, but that doesn't mean that I should. And that certainly doesn't mean that my love for that person is any less or that I am ashamed of being with that person simply because I don't choose to make out with them in public, or do something sexual in public.
Post 40: Guilty as charged, apparently I didn't, as yo usaid, pay attention. I'd thought I had but must have missed something. To the rest? I guess I underestimate like you said. I thought we were talking people getting the proverbial bee in their bonnet over someone hugging and kissing in public. And by kissing I didn't entirely mean a full makeout session but certainly a kiss on the lips or cheek.
Whatever I am, I am willing to admit it where I went wrong.
and, on the same token, being sexually open doesn't mean I don't value myself or my partner. as Wayne said, there's nothing wrong with openness. in fact, most guys, at least those I've talked to, would love if more women were adventurous, and less concerned with always keeping things private.
as I've said earlier on, I know how to be unclassy, and that isn't my style, much less something I'd encourage. some may see my views as classless, though, and that's fine.
I think the truth is, if you want to be accepted, try accepting other people. Don't wanta look at it? Look the other way. See a couple standoffish acting like it's the heart of Afghanistan? Let 'em be.
thank you, leo, for saying what I feel, and was gonna add.
But who says you aren't adventurous if you want to keep things discrete? You aren't limmitted or much less inhibited than those who dont' bother with discression that much. being discrete doesn't mean being ashamed. It also doesn't mean you aren't willing to do this or that, it means, you aren't willing to do them on the bus at three PM right across the isle from a mom, say, and her three kids.
So the sexually open want to declare that it doesn't mean they don't value themselves and the more restrained wish to declare that it doesn't mean they're not adventurous. Common thread here.
The irony of the situation now as it stands is those who stood in opposition to others' behavior now themselves seek tolerance. Hmm, perhaps best for all of us to maybe not second-guess motive.
as I said, Bernadetta, I wouldn't knowingly make out in front of children.g
To Chelsea: Hahhahah, being intimidated by you? … hardly! But thank you for the laughs; it is nice to end the day on a positive note, and for that, I thank you. Smiles. As for sexual hang ups… no, no, no…! I just have enough respect for myself and my body to not display it cheaply for all public eyes to see. My body and my sexuality are the 2 gifts I choose to offer to my partner, and my partner alone within the sanctity of our private space. Why do you think people go the extra mild to gift wrapped something before offering it to someone? Let me answer it for you… because something that is hidden tends to adds to the surprise, mystery and intrigue. Moreover, I’m not the one using other guy’s opinions to back up my own point of view! Why should I care that most guys you talk to prefer women to be more adventurous, and less concerned with keeping things private? After all, shouldn’t The preference of my partner and his sexual values are what matter to me the most???. As for being ashamed of showing affections toward my partner, I’m not even going to address that since I’ve already done that several times… pointless to continuously beat up a dead horse!
Now to Leo’s comment about seeking tolerance… I think I can safely speak for those who are supposedly opposed to others being sexually opened, that we don’t seek sir, we are tolerant…! How many times in our posts did we not say that if people choose to be just so, then all the power to them? Or that they’re ok with that but it’s not there style that is all???. Maybe you should either A. since both you and I believe in words being precious, should read through the posts more carefully, or B, look up the definition of tolerant? Which incidentally does not mean embracing or accepting said behavior by the way! It just mean live and let live.
Being discrete? keeps you from getting arrested. In society you really have to draw a line.
Now I laugh about sex on a bus, because I'm guilty of that too. However, it was done discretely. Also it was on a Greyhound full of adult gamblers, no children, in case someone figured it out.
We had to back seat, the lights were off, and no one had to pee. We also had her skirt for covering. Just looked like she was sitting on my lap. Lol
As I have said, I'm not having sex on 5th avenue, and I'm one of the most open people you'll ever meet. Not only can I not get in to it properly, it is not exactly legal, and a night spent in jail oover a quickie I could have had in the bathroom, if I just had to, isn't worth that quickie. Lol
When I had vision enough, I've never seen anyone going over the line of legal, and that is cool with me.
I really thing the public excepted stuff is really sweet. You can have sex over a meal, and be totally above board. It makes stuff heat up for when you can actually get to it.
well said, Wayne.
Kim, I wasn't referring to one particular person when I said people are intimidated by me.
Again Kim I'll readily admit where I was wrong. However, the thing that gets to me is not one's use or lack thereof of affections or what have you, it's the inference about children. Inference that people who are black, gay, sexually open or any number of other groups, are an automatic safety risk to children. The skinheads of my youth made all the claims made here about sexually open people, only made them against blacks. That blacks hump in the open, are completely mindless when it comes to the well-being of children in the area, and the list goes on. Same goes for these groups that are opposed to the gays. Ironically, these are the same claims made by the Catholic church against women who were said to be witches.
In other words, people who wish to denigrate somebody first oversexualize them and second paint them in a light nobody can support: a pedophile, or at best someone who seriously compromises the sexual safety of children. Since most affection doesn't even lead to sex, the oversexualization doesn't make sense. Just like the Westboro and similar people who claim all the gays ever think about is sex, doesn't make sense when you look at architecture they've built, enigma machines they've cracked, and a zillion other accomplishments. I don't believe the more discreet oppress children. Nor do I think the more open compromise their safety and commit the high crimes that are expressed or implied by some arguments on here. I probably land somewhere in the middle of the two extreme ends myself.
But the reason I find the oversexualized descriptions by some arguing on here so unbelievable, is they usually point to crimes, - doing this in front of kids is a form of child sexual abuse, and they use the same picture of animalistic sexuality in public that the white supremacists used against blacks, or the Westboro Baptists use against the gays.
I definitely make my share of mistakes online and offline, a scarce few of which Kim justifiably pointed out on here. But character assassination, especially as it relates to crime or child sex abuse, that is rather an untouchable area to me.
Yes, that is true Leo. It is seriously wrong in thinking, but it is as it is.
hmm, interesting debate, what will be consider as being discrete in public, and what will consider as being public and not discrete?
I, like Wayne have had sexual contact with someone on a bus. we were sitting at the back, she was laying on my lap, and she enjoyed being fingered. no one batted an eye. hell, the guy that was with us, had no idea it was even happening. good times.
Yes, I suppose sex on a bus is extremely public and can be done discreetly, so I'd say that anything that is easy noticed is public and can be labled discreet or not.
Kissing, fondling or kissing intimate places covered or not, could be public viewable.
I should add, it is my opinion that people have a right not to be exposed to public sex interaction, but affection is not sex actually.
Noticing a couple kissing, holding hands, hugging, or playing with each others naked feet under a table, and such things is only sexual depending on how you think about it.
Because we can't know how a person see it,is why I have the opinion I have.
I think it is sweet, and easy unnoticed.
well said, Wayne.
Lol, this cracked me up, I am not a sexual person all like that, so he has to be special, and in public hell naa, not even a kiss in public, well maybe one, but no over board, unless in the bedroom, and Real just lol, just lol.
" A loving hug, a gentle kiss on the lips, the holding of hands, the arms around one another’s shoulders … I think you’ve gotthe the jest ."
completely agreed.
I agree with Kim... while there's nothing wrong with expressing affection, it's important to consider those around us, because, you know, there're two kinds of people in this world, yourself and others, period.
I personally don't care what people do in public to each their own. And even if I here things, I'd shut up for it's not my business. I mean, it doesn't necessarrilly mean I'll do the same, however, while I can't see it, those who do might feel some discomfort, that's all. I like to keep my things to myself and to whoever my partner would be, after all, he's my partner, and, we sexually'd enjoy each other in our own time and place. I'm not saying I'd not give him hugs, or hold his hand or a kiss every now and then, but there's a limit, especially in public. I can be madly in love, or crazy about my partner, and he can too, but part of life is also knowing what's yours, and what's others. I don't care what other guys think of girls being adventurous, for I'm not them; All I care about is what my partner wants and expects of me, because he's MY partner, and I, of cource, have respect for him, and would suit his likes and needs with great pleasure
since people seem to be jumping to conclusions that I don't/wouldn't respect whoever I'm with, I feel I'll state, for the last time, that nowhere in my posts have I said, or even implied, that respect is out the window.
hey if the shoe fits? And, I was speaking for myself.
no shoe fits here, so that doesn't apply. live and let live, I say.
feel life is only once. so do your own thing. but be safe about it. just my thoughts. in my personal relationship. i save the special momants for personal time. and that is it. back to your normal zone program.
i agree that in some ways it is inappropriate of where it is done but if it is just stuff like holding hands, giving a kiss or two or having one's arm around the other person that isn't a problem cause it is just them showing the world that they love each other and the other stuff is for when you are by yourself and some where private.