• 3 Posts
  • 149 Comments
Joined 3 个月前
cake
Cake day: 2025年5月29日

help-circle




  • I just want to say that “get fucked” is a somewhat offensive term imo 😅 It implies a power dynamic where the man is doing the fucking and the woman only gets fucked. I think a better way to ask this would be “Why shouldn’t women fuck…” Or “have sex” etc 😊

    As for your question, generally speaking there is no absolute reason not to have sex during your period, but there are some things that can make it harder/unpleasant for some period having people ⚧️

    • The blood adds friction, so you might need more lube to keep it pleasant
    • the vagina might be sensitive so it might make it painful
    • the cramping and general symptoms of a period might just make them not in the mood for it, but it could also do the opposite and make them horny.
    • And obviously the blood can make the sex more messy.
    • etc

    So very individual, i would just define it as just a situation that is different from the “norm” 😄

    And a quick note about culture. There are many cultures and religions that define the period as “dirty” in some way and some even go as far as forbidding a man from touching a woman if she is on her period. Fuck that misogynistic bullshit.


  • Being a chaser, as far as I understand, is objectifying. Treating a trans woman as a womans body with a penis and not a woman who happens to have a penis. It’s about caring more about their genitals and body than them being a person.

    Just like in the world of hooking up, the line between objectifying and just being direct about the reason you are there can be confusing.

    If you respect trans women as women and not as a body type then I think you are okay. If you think of trans women as only applicable for sex, then you are not okay.


  • I agree with you, but I think it’s important to understand when such laws might be relevant, especially when it comes to unconscious/under the influence. I think that the law needs to be a bit over protective of the passive person, it just needs to be very clear that the law is to be upheld by it’s intent and not by it’s literal definition.

    For example maybe a couple X and Y has an agreement on sleep sex, but X decides to abuse it. let’s say they had a fight and person X invited Y to have sex, but Y declined, so person X waits for Y to fall asleep, and then has sex with them. If a week ago they agreed on sex while sleeping, it is still obvious that X abused their verbal agreement to rape Y. So if the law doesn’t protect against that situation it is a problem.

    Like a lot of laws, the important thing is to follow the intent and not the written definition, but corruption usually finds loopholes.