Promiscuity? Your choice or mine?

[Anonymous]

I think the whole concept of slut shamming is actually ridiculous. Everyone has sex, everyone expresses themselves differently and I just so happen to do mine through sexual innuendos. I do not believe that the act of sex is sinful or something that is forbidden until the day in which people tie the knot and give themselves to their love. I will never apologize for thinking that sex, is just that. SEX. It doesn’t have to be with someone you love, have feelings for or even know. I think the whole concept about life is experiencing new things. I think what gets me is how people can sit there and judge others about their promiscuity but they are by no means living their life in any perfect way shape or forum.

I think the world slut is just thrown around so loosely now a days, just like when people assume that a women is loose because of the number of sexual partners she has had. Now I get that the big numbers may look bad, but I do not think that should be a reflection on a person. A number does not reflect on who they are, just as a tight dress makes a girl easy. You are what you make yourself.

Also note, just because a girl has a lot of sexual partners does not mean that her lady bits are loose. Learn the human anatomy a little before you sit there and judge me because of my lifestyle and my body choices.

You see, I have been diagnosed with a sex addiction. I have tried medications, the stupid counseling they suggest and even going to an addictions group that was a “god” centered environment. It’s like just because I am a female, I get judged period, then add on the sexual addiction and holy hell I am going straight to the devil for my sins, good lord. Unless I am inflicting pain on someone, ruining families or anything in that nature, I don’t think that I need to be told how to live my life.

It is my body and I will do what I want.

Am I worried that a guy will never date me because of my promiscuous past? Not at all.

Do I care that guy’s think easy girls are slutty? Not really.

Trash Attracts Trash:

Not true, you can attract any type of person that you want in this world. I don’t think just because you have a difference in your life means that you will just attract those types of people.

I can say I have never been in love. Have I chosen to not be in love? Maybe. Have I dated the wrong types of people in my life? Maybe. I am young, I have so much that I have to live for. The thing about sex for me is that it does not fill this empty void. I am not miserable. I am not lonely. I am not a whore. I am not these labels that people insist on putting those who are just sexually expressive. I am sorry that you can not look at sex in any other light besides it being holy and important.

But guess what?….

It is not your place, my place or anyone’s place to judge someone based on WHAT THEY DO. Do you like people in your business? No? Well then why does it seem like it is okay to put your nose in someone’s sexual business out of all the things that you can pick. Why that?

Why do people tend to focus on the bad and not the good?

You got me on that one.

Let me tell you a little story about myself okay?

I bust my ass working a full time job and going to school full time. You know what I have to show for that? My GPA that I have worked so hard to keep. If I want to have a drink to relax, how is that okay, but the minute I want to lay down and relieve stress in a NATURAL WAY is all of a sudden oh no! She did what? With who? How many times? Wow that is so gross!

Oh but people would talk if I resorted to drugs and drinking right? Calling me a tweaker to an alcoholic, yet some how this is better than the girl who has sex.

Yeah, I am the girl who has sex. I love sex. If sex was not suppose to happen, we would not have a penis nor a vagina.

All I am sayin is that sex is OKAY. It is OKAY to go out and have sex once a day, twice a day how ever many times. It is about making sure YOU are happy, not anyone else.

I have learned no matter what you do in life, you will never make everyone happy. So I am picking the most important person to make happy in this world and that is myself.

I know many people will be up in arms about this whole shibang, but hey its 2015 and not 1955.

Sex is sex. Sex is Love. Sex is WHATEVER YOU MAKE IT TO BE.

Till next time.

[hellionthesage]

It being your choice does not mean its the healthy choice or that it is morally right (I don't think morals factor into it either way personally) or that its logical or justifiable, all that it means is that you have the capacity to choose, nothing more nothing less. We know scientificly that sex is not just sex. There is ample evidence that shows promiscuity has severe negative consequences beyond just the physical aspects ie stds and unwanted pregnancies/abortions/single parent households. There is absolutely a phsycological factor (thanks to oxytocin which is released during sex that creates emotional bonds) If sex is just sex then that is usualy a sign that your brain has released oxytocin with so many different people that it has hampered your ability to create emotional bonds with people in an intimate way.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/.../nihms499028.pdf
www.iza.org/.../sabia_j4820.pdf
cdn.freedomainradio.com/...iage_Partners_Study.pdf
https://www.intpforum.com/showthread.php?t=11622
socialpathology.blogspot.com/.../...orce-risk.html
socialpathology.blogspot.com/.../...uity-data.html
Sex is natural, promiscuity is not. We evolved to function in small groups of 20-30 with people we regularly interacted with and as such where not having sex with complete strangers. We also evolved to have investment parenting (focus on few children) which necessitates monogamy or near monogamy conditions. STDs where leathel and there was no contraceptive, there was no abortion and pregnancy put a woman in a sensitive state where she would have no ability to defend or provide for herself as well as being extremely resource intensive (a death sentence to our ancestors) Having a sex drive and understanding the sex drive are two differnt things. We crave sugar and fat as well, that doesn't mean you shovel lard and sugar down your gullet every time your hungry. We developed a desire for them because they where rare, it was to encourage us to seek out that which was rare. Because of its ability to activate the pleasure centers of our brains we found ways to exploit our enviroment to meet those needs, and then to exceed them hence the obesity problem in first world countries. Sex is no different, it was meant to function as a driving force but now because we have contraceptives and abortions we think that we understand it as being natural to indulge it every chance we get. Our brains are not wired for it, and neithe is our society, its why monogamy and marriage came about the moment we became an agrarian based society.
The ability to choose does not necessitate the ability to choose well.

[RandomUsername3464]

I'm surprised this post wasn't deleted, or spam-bombed by the pro-slut posters that lurk in every corner of this site. Good points though.

[hellionthesage]

@RandomUsername3464 Thank you, I try to be as honest as possible and hope truth prevails.

[DocT1977]

Gotta say man, Very well written. I too have been attacked by those who seem to have a desire to validate their own immoral behavior. Bottom line is this. If someone does not like how others might perceive them, Then don't demand they change their perceptions. But instead, for these who don't like how others might perceive them (due to their own actions), Then I shall advise them to work on their own self image.

[hellionthesage]

@DocT1977 Very true, people dislike shaming because it makes them feel bad, completely disregarding the reason it exists. You don't punish a child for bad behavior because you enjoy making them suffer, you do it because you want them to make wise descisions so that when they get older they won't waste/ruin there life with bad choices that they made on impulse. Societal shaming is in fact no different then parenting, just on a larger scale. I always found it strange that people seem to never notice the similarities, or to even consider that it exists for a reason. I'm all for adapting but to throw out something without understanding it always seemed like a poor judgment call.

[DocT1977]

@hellionthesage I do agree with you with respect to the fact that slut shaming, or any other kind of shaming does make people feel bad. I will give you that. I will also say this, Most of the time when you confront people about their own actions, and even if the choice is made to back up all you say with fact, It is nine times out of ten going to be seen as offensive. Sadly, in today's society, It is all about pointing fingers, and playing the victim card, regardless of the facts or the truthful reality that confronts said "victims". It's all a part of the politically correct word that we live in sadly. If people took responsibility for their actions as opposed to calling all who disagree as slut shamers, bigots, closed minded, or whatever, Then perhaps we would be in a better overall situation.

[hellionthesage]

@DocT1977 This is decadence. We have a society where we have managed to remove most of the obvious negative ramifications to various behaviors. Now we are begining to see the negative impacts its having and eventually it will result in a back swing to a much more conservative state. It happens all the time, rome, japan, greece etc. A society becomes decadent which destroyes social cohesion which eventually culminates into a swing back to more conservative state in an attempt at a social self preservation.

[DocT1977]

@hellionthesage Oh I completely agree. People have been able to censor those who warn of the danger of political correctness. Now you have all these different groups seeking liberation, and how are they getting it? The hypocrisy of political correctness. Or in other words, Stand up for my cause, even if it goes against your beliefs, OR, Defend your beliefs and have a smear campaign brought against you. Political Correctness was used by Adolph Hitler and Joseph Stalin to divide their respective countries to have everyone pitted against each other in the name of self entitlement. And what pisses me off so much is the majority of people have no idea what they are buying into.

[hellionthesage]

@DocT1977 Of course it was. There is nothing more tempting then being told that you are right. That is polical correctness, society stating that you can do no wrong and that the world has to change for you not you changing for the world. Its the path of least resistenc. Its easier to stay the same then it is to change. Thats why we are not allowed to shame anything thats easy, only that which is hard.

[DocT1977]

@hellionthesage So true. With the cause of political correctness, There are a few choices that we can make. We can support it, therefore we can support the division that comes with it since it only harnesses the principals of casting blame instead of taking responsibility. Another choice is to educate people that if they want tolerance, Then understand that it is a sword that cuts both ways. Instead of it being something that should be given to them without reciprocation being given to others with differing points of view, It should contain the willingness to disagree without all the labels given to those who don't support politically correct causes.

[Stacyzee]

I was with you in this until I read you have a sex addiction.
As anyone knows any addiction in any shape or form can be dangerous.

People who are sex addicts often out their lives at risk some may prostitute or frequent them (which is illegal in most states), engage in frequent unprotected sex.
If their addiction is extremely bad they may betray the ones they love by breaking up marriages or relationships etc.
That's all around bad.
I'm not judging , I'm just giving you my view.

No addiction , whatever it is is safe

[Stacyzee]

*often put their lives at risk

[pnl86]

“When you judge others, you do not define them, you define yourself.”

― Earl Nightingale

[LuckyLittleLucy]

Thank you.
People say "well sluts are just girls who lots of sex- Google definitions say so!". Well by Jove, if Google says so it must be true! *Please read the word derogatory, when you do this- it means the word is offensive and/or vulgar*.
Also, behold, the madonna/whore complex. The sexual double standard that says men can sexually do whatever they like, whether that means sex with a different girl every day or no sex at all. It's fine. But women are expected to be pure and if they like sex, then they must be easy, just taking it from anyone just for attention or something.
Then there's the whole "nice guys want good girls- not sluts".
Nice guys want whoever the hell they want- sexual experience has f all to do with it!
Would you turn a girl down because she changes her cereal every month? Or if she eats cereal every day? No. So why does it matter that girls have had a different sexual partner every month, or choose to have sex every day?
If your sexual differences make you incompatible, that's okay.
What's not okay is shaming girls for your sexual differences.
Female virgins are prudes and girls who like sex are sluts- girls can't win. So stop being silly people.

[gray_sailor]

Once again I am completely amazed at how this discussion can take place without using the essential terms.

SOCIOSEXUAL ORIENTATION

Right alongside gender, gender identity, gender presentation & sexual orientation there exists another dimention of normal sexual identity.

Sociosexual Orientation describes a person's ability and predisposition to relate sexually with others. Like other dimentions of sexual identity, Sociosexual Orientation, once developed, remains constant over time. A person's Sociosexual Orientation identifies their placement on a spectrum between two extremes:
- Sociosexually Restricted
- Sociosexually Unrestricted.

You are very Sociosexually Unrestricted.

Unrestricted people:
- engage in casual sex
- begin sexual activity at younger ages
- initiate sexual activity earlier in a relationship
- separate love and sex
- have large numbers of sexual partners
- are accepting of their partners number

Restricted people:
- limit sexual activity to relationships
- don't separate love and sex
- delay the onset of sexual activity
- engage sexually later in relationships
- have low numbers of sexual partners
- require their partners to have the same views on love and sex that they hold

The current sociosexual orientation breakdown for the US is this:

Males
57 % Unrestricted
43 % Restricted

Females
47 % Unrestricted
53 % Restricted

What everyone needs to know about sociosexual orientation is this:
1) know your own orientation
2) only seek relationships with those of your same orientation.

For the record, I am:
- male
- cis-gendered
- masculine presenting
- heterosexual
- moderately sociosexually restricted

I have had sex with 6 women in my life, and with the exception of a single one night stand, I've loved every one of them.

Take note, there is no shaming language in my statements. I have simply stated that each person has a fundemental nature. Each person should act in accordance with their nature.

It is wrong to shame someone about their nature.

It is also wrong to think that there is only one natural way to be.

[hellionthesage]

This disregards all the correlary information that shows the negative impacts that both create the behavior and are a result of the behavior. For instance it has been shown that a strong relationship with a father affects a womans probability of being "sociosexually unrestricted"(among other things) placing it as a behavioral issue rather then something innate.

[hellionthesage]

To clarify, a strong relationship with the father results in fewer sexual partner and an older age when she does actually begin to engage in sex. In short emotional stability and well being has been positively linked to sociosexually restricted behavior while emotional instability and poor family life have all been linked to sociosexually unrestricted behavior. Again showing that it is a behavior and an emotional issue rather then a genetic predisposition.

[gray_sailor]

@hellionthesage You are conflating two different things because they yield what is superficially the same outcome. Sociosexual orientation is established in the following way: About 50% of the cause is determined prior to birth. It is a combination of genetic factors and the hormone bath the fetus receives during gestation. The remaining 50% doesn't come into play until after puberty has run its course. We are social animals. As older teens and young adults, we seek out friends, coworkers, and other social influences. In seeking a peer group we choose who we are going to become. For someone who starts out predisposed to unrestriction, exposure to an unrestricted peer group will yield a very unrestricted outcome. Similiarly, for someone who starts out predisposed to restriction, exposure to a restricted peer group will yield a very restricted outcome. People whose peer groups reflect the opposite orientation of their predisposition achieve a more balanced result. [continued]

[gray_sailor]

@hellionthesage What you are talking about isn't sociosexual orientation at all. You are discussing attachment pathologies. It is possible for two different people to engage in the same behavior as a consequence of different causes. The normal and healthy unrestricted individual can participate in many casual sexual encounters and the go on to for a long term relationship without problems. This is because they can disconnect love and sex. A person with an attachment pathology may appear to engage in the same behavior (casual sex). But the circumstances are different. For such a person, it's not that they disconnect love and sex, it's that they lack the ability to love in a healthy way. Love is disconnected from sex because love (for them) does not exist. Unlike the unrestricted individual who can voluntarily reconnect love and sex in the context of a long term relationship, a person with an attachment pathology can't make a romantic connection at all. [continued]

[gray_sailor]

@hellionthesage Nearly half of the female population and almost 60% of the males are sociosexually unrestricted. Asserting that their natural behavior constitutes psychological deformity is insulting and unfounded. What I want people to understand is that normal sexual behavior: a) is not that different between genders b) varies widely within each gender Knowing this, people can make better decisions about their sexual and romantic lives.

[hellionthesage]

But that disregards the fact that people who score higher in the sociosexually unrestriceted scale have a significantly higher rate of divorce and a 50% probability of cheating. One cannot claim that they are able to separate sex and love if they are routinley sacrificing love for sex. If they are willing to sacrifice a relationship for sex that is not simply them being able to separate sex from intimacy but rather a addiction trait. Also if we can reliably associate emotional state/wellbeing with sexual proclivity then the logical conclusion is that it would be connected and not merely coincedence. Further we know that biologicly when a person has sex the brain secretes a compound called oxytocin that is designed for emotional bonding, the more its released with multiple people the weaker the bonds are and the less the affects are (this is probably why promiscuity has been linked to divorce and cheating) So biologicly speaking we can show that we are not really built for promiscuity.

[hellionthesage]

We also know that a person whith fewer partners reports higher levels of marital satisfaction then those who have had more partners, reliably. To suggest that promiscuity is routinley due to emotional issues but then claim that it also isn't is not particularly reasonable. If you touch an object and get a rash a 100 different times what is the probably scenario? That your allergic to that substance or that its something else? Well its possible that its something else but it wouldn't be a logical conclusion to come to. To claim that sociosexually unrestricted behavior is completely natural despite all evidence showing that its highly destructive to the well being of the individual is like some one claiming they do crack because they enjoy it not because they have a problem and they can stop when ever they want. Is it possible? Yes. Is it likely? No, a person claiming that they don't have a problem then goes and performs the behavior to there detriment, sacrificing there families,

[hellionthesage]

relationships, and in some cases carreers with complete disregard for how that may impact them in the future is not idicative of a non issue but rather of addictive behavior.

[gray_sailor]

@hellionthesage You are way way out in the tall grass here. The National Survey of Family growth conducted by the CDC gives a useful context here. As of the most recent survey, (2011-2013) the reported average LIFETIME number of sexual partners is 6.6 for men and 4.3 for women*. For the vast majority of people, we are talking about fewer than a dozen sexual partners. These are likely spread over many years. The bad consequences you are talking about don't apply in these cases. Still, sociosexual orientation does exist. People who are closely matched with regard to all dimentions of compatibility, socisexual orientation included, will have the best chance at success over time. The issue is not about personal shortcomings. Rather it is difference in life experience that drives people apart. There are always going to be some people who have mental, emotional and psychological issues. Asserting that half of the population possess some fundemental flaw simply strains credibility.

[hellionthesage]

"the reported average LIFETIME number of sexual partners is 6.6 for men and 4.3 for women*." for that I woud ask what average are they using? Is it the median/mode/mean/range? Their would most likely be a different number for each varient of the average. Also women whe told that they where hooked up to a polygraph reported numbers higher then what they did when they where not so that would affect the accuracy of the average as well (the issue of self reporting). Then of course averages can be skewed if one person has many sexual partners while the many have few. That asid I don't see its relevenece as it pertains to my statements. I did not question the number of sexual partners merely pointed out that all data shows a strong correlation with promiscuity and emotional issues. As for the consequences not applying, we know that a woman who has only had sex with one person (her husband) has a divorce probabilty of 1% while if she ha sex with two it jumps to 16%.

[hellionthesage]

I woud argue that it does apply (obviously 16% is not a high number but it is a very large jump and shoud not be ignored). "Still, sociosexual orientation does exist. People who are closely matched with regard to all dimentions of compatibility, socisexual orientation included, will have the best chance at success over time." Again I would point out the significantly higher divorce rate for these people and the 50% probability of infedelity would be highly suggestive that it is not simply a matter of being mismatched but again of an addictive type behavior. "Asserting that half of the population possess some fundemental flaw simply strains credibility." Not really, its not a claim of inherent issue but of social one which would influence a large number of people. We can see social issues resulting in negative impacts amongst the majority population in most defective cultutural practices. Decadent life styles have appeared many times and in many place, and failed in all of them.

[gray_sailor]

@hellionthesage I meant to make reference to the differences between reported number of sexual partners as it differs between men and women. There are three causes for the discrepancy: 1) Men tend to report their number of past sexual partners in numbers evenly divisible by five. This will introduce rounding error. 2) Women and men often regard different acts as being sex. For instance, women tend to discount felatio. His genitals are exposed, she may be fully clothed. He is brought to orgasm. She is not. For him, this act counts as sex. For her, not so much. 3) Men are the overwhelming users of prostitutes. Men would include acts that occured with a prostitute while the prostitutes themselves were not included in the survey.

[hellionthesage]

I'm aware of the deviations but I was asking how they where pertinent to the initial remark. Obviously people will have sex and its highly unlikely it will be with just one person I was merely pointing out the data that showed as number of partners increased so did the number of relationship/personal issues. So how does number of partners each gender has (on average (a really vague term as I pointed out, not really a fan of it, to misleading)) relate to the negative consequences of promiscuity?(Just need some clarification, not trying to be insulting or anything)

[juststrollin]

As a girl, I hate slut shaming. I really, really hate it and it shouldn't exist. because we are all human and a human being a female doesn't take away from a sex drive so thats one thing I agree with. Now you said sex is sex and nothing else... I have to differ on that. So this isn't coming from some religious place but if you really think about it... your body is all you freaking has that really matters. Its priceless. When everything leaves you or a disaster happens you have uyour body. And we have to protect it for germs, diseases, and what not because stds, stis, and other things cripple your body. Thats your comfort, immune system, blood. it can lead to fatigue, chronic yeast infections, making it easier for other viruses (and most girls have had yeast infections, and it can make you feel less sexy. So, to have whoever, whenever, after 5 mins, entering your body, which youve worked to keep up your whole life and protected for nasty harm and diseases, is sort of silly. I mean you can give away anything of your often and freely but not that ;/ Being sexually active is cool but multiactive with different people all the time... its just not healthy. And things like herpes are skin contact viruses, like if a guy with a dead cold sore (can look like a pimple on the sige of mouth) gives you oral... hello outbreaks and less sex when you want it.

Im all fo rnot slut shaming, but there's health reasons on a human level to why people shame anyone with partners all the time, its a threat to the body and most people want there's to be fine to live an uncrippled and embarassed life is all.

Consider being tested before each sexual partner, and waiting for a ongoing partner tha tis healthy. Because its just better for everyone. Thats alland best luck but screw slut shaming.

[RachelBrigs]

I agree with you completely but... I won't date someone who's slept with a lot of people. Just like its your right to have as much sex as you please with as many people, its my right to choose not to date someone bc of their #

[Kinstrome]

I think I hear about the ills of slut-shaming more often than I hear people shaming others for their sexual history. Maybe that's just a GAG thing.

My view on men and women who have many, many one-night stands is the same as people who use cheating devices to access special content in video games: It's their game, and they can do what they want with it. It's not inherently immoral. However, I can't help but think they are missing out on something they would get if they put in the long-term effort that other people do.

I also think, after many years of therapy and witnessing such kinds of people, that multitudes of sex partners are associated with an individual's low self-esteem. This isn't always the case (like everything in life), but it's a self-reinforcing cause of it. People with low self-esteem tend to look for short-term pleasure, whether physical or emotional, and sex is one of the most obvious choices of both (probably second only to mood-altering drugs).

This doesn't mean it's good to harangue people for having lots of sex; if being slutty is destructive, then it will bring about destructive consequences naturally without others' vocal judgments. I believe in the liberty of people to choose their lifestyle. Likewise I believe in the liberty of people to form opinions about other people, because individuals with high self-esteem care relatively little about the opinions of others.

[TheDevilInside]

Big news girl: people judge. It's in our innate nature. And yes, people judge others based on looks. Otherwise why would you think people Bully fat people even though they know nothing about their stories? Why would people Bully the disabled? Call people with down syndrome "mongoloids"?

Guess what? You can do (literally) whatever and who ever you want, prance around naked as you want, but people can also do whatever they want. And that means judge and condemn you. You have to be OK with that. It's also their right to judge you. You can't just say oh i'm gonna wear next to nothing to a class and then demand people to not judge and stare and talk about you. Thinking so is just delusional and detached from reality.

If you show your tits, you gotta be OK with the stares.

[Lolomon]

well a spade is a spade. I call both sexes hoes or sluts based on their actions. It takes a lot more self discipline to not sleep with everything with a pulse. Sex is love, no sex is a way to get yours. Big difference between having sex/fucking than making love. But why do you care what people say? You speak on your actions like you are proud of it and confident, so you shouldn't care what people say! Own it and love it! My question is how do you feel about people who choose to have few partners, or wait until marriage or until they have feelings? if you your judging them you have no room to hate on those who judge you.

[ThisDudeHere]

"Trash Attracts Trash:"

So wait... if I'm not going to date women due to them being promiscuous then that means I'm trash and I deserve only trash? What if I just don't want a woman who has slept around? By no means will I shame such a woman, I would not judge her, I wouldn't be hostile to her in any way BUT I would just not want to date her. Am I in the wrong somehow?

[ThisDudeHere]

Oh wait... my bad. Misread it.

[AleDeEurope]

I agree with you, sex can be just sex if you want it to be. Some people can separate sex from emotions, other can't.
But you're wrong when you say we shouldn't judge people for what they do, or that having lots of sex doesn't define you as a person. That's wrong. Your actions define who you are, and we judge people based on their actions, their words, their looks... And it's ok to judge, it's perfectly fine and normal to do so. What is wrong is when people judge and make assumptions, and stick with those like if they were true and don't try to get to know the person better

Like I said, I do agree with your overall message, what you're trying to say, but your actions still define who you are, and people are gonna judge based on that.

[abundantlyrich]

If i choose to do it, i would keep it as a secret :PPPPP

[DocT1977]

When I dated, I had certain standards that had to be met. I was not interested in women who dressed no differently than your typical hooker, and I did not want women who have played musical dicks with every guy in town.

Call it slut shaming, or whatever you like. But I like women with class, Women with morals who don't need to go prancing around looking like a booty call that can easily be had for $2.00 on some street corner.

And no, I have no interest in lowering my standards just because you want to validate your immoral behavior. If you act like a slut, and look like a slut, Then you will be perceived as a slut. No self respecting man wants everyone else's second hand left overs.

If you don't like how others perceive you, Then perhaps it's time to work on your own image as opposed to asking others to change their perception, simply for the reason of you not liking it or wanting validation.

[RandomUsername3464]

Fuck off with your Tumblr posts. I've rejected quite a few girls before that wanted to go out with me, but I turned them down because they were sluts. I make MY own choices too, so don't take a hissy fit and complain on Tumblr when you realize that no decent guy wants to go anywhere near you. Decent guys don't want sluts, they want decent girls, and no amount of emotional Internet activism will ever change that.

[JuicyBrain]

Why would any decent girl want a manslut like you? Maybe they're just less judgmental than you are...

[RandomUsername3464]

@JuicyBrain I only once came very close to sex, and I didn't go through with it. It's not my fault that I was asked out a lot before, apparently I'm good looking (although I think I am shy and ugly). But what I said is still true, decent guys don't like sluts, and no amount of Internet activism or forced change can actually change that. Dodging sluts is like dodging bullets.

[JuicyBrain]

So you're still a virgin? At least, you're not a hypocrite. The problem here is not that you prefer non promiscuous women. It's that you shame promiscuous women and call them "sluts". THAT's the problem. Choose any girl you want, but don't shame promiscuous girls. Just as other people don't shame you for still being a virgin at 23.

[RandomUsername3464]

@JuicyBrain That's false, my older friend. I've been taunted and called everything under the sun when it comes to my virginity. Slutty girls complain of discrimination yet they join in this virgin shaming culture. Two of the girls I rejected because I knew they were promiscuous slandered me later as well. It doesn't seem to be true that my choice is excluded from this new cultural crusade. But too bad for them, I've been this way for a while and my decisions won't change.

[JuicyBrain]

Two girls mocked you and that entitles you to call every promiscuous girls sluts? Makes sense...

[RandomUsername3464]

@JuicyBrain Not just them, but a lot of people my age, girls and guys. People at work, school. acquaintances, people on the Internet (although I don't count them really). Judgment works both ways in this case, but I just don't think it's true that people respect the decisions of guys like me. But that's life.

[JuicyBrain]

That doesn't entitle you to belittle people is what I meant. I get that you are frustrated, but it's no carte blanche...

[RandomUsername3464]

@JuicyBrain Well, perhaps the same people that complain endlessly about "slut shaming" shouldn't partake in virgin shaming then. Just a suggestion.

[JuicyBrain]

They absolutely shouldn't. Don't stoop to their level.

[schnipdip]

@JuicyBrain it's true. Virgins are chastised for being a virgin... If virgins can be chastised without any activism supporting virginity then whores can be slut shamed... Don't try to condone poor behavior.

[JuicyBrain]

@schnipdip "whores can be slut shamed" "Don't try to condone poor behavior" *smh* fucking idiot !

[RandomUsername3464]

@JuicyBrain He is trying to make the same point I did, that if they can insult me then I can insult them. The true solution is to away from this whole paradigm, life is so much greater than "slut vs virgin", but people don't stop insulting others just because someone told them to.

[JuicyBrain]

Like I said before, the fact that you are laughed at does not make it ok for you to laugh at others. Can't you see you are being part of the problem? I am ginger. The fact that I have been bullied in elementary school does not make me entitled to bully others. It's counter-productive.

[rjroy3]

The sad truth...

What determines whether or not a girl is a slut: How many people know about it.

Don't make your business everyone else's business and you won't have a problem. But when you try to have everyone accept what you do behind closed doors is the bigger issue. Personally I don't care if a girl had a lot of sexual partners, but good or bad that fact still gives me a certain impression of her. What's more important is your character. Who you are now and what you do now. Carry yourself in a way that is respectable.

[Bandit74]

(Do I care that guy’s think easy girls are slutty? Not really)

Well, why did you write this take then?
The whole point of this take is to persuade people to not label easy girls as sluts, so clearly you DO care.

Anyways... I dont think they should be labeled as immoral or contantly insulted but I think everyone is entitled to their preferences for a partner. Just like girls might refuse to date a guy based on his height (number), or salary (number), I think guys should be able to refuse to date girls based on their number of sexual partners.

Also there are studies that show a correlation between high number of sexual partners and increased risk of divorce and marriage dissatisfaction. Also considering that the guy is often the higher income earner and the one who ends up paying alimony. Now while I dont think sexual history should be the sole determining factor for whether or not to date someone, II think its worth at least taking into consideration.

[FakeName123]

It is because people instinctively know that promiscuity is a red flag of bad mental health and science proves it time and time again.

Promiscuous people have been linked again and again to...
... mental instability and higher rates of mental illness
... higher rates of STDs (It's a numbers game)
... be more likely to be a single parent (numbers game)
... have higher rates of abortion (numbers game)
... have less stable relationships and higher divorce rates
... have increased chances of having been in an abusive relationship
... be more likely to cheat
... be more likely to become addicted
... be more likely to come out of a broken household.

Want some sources?

cdn.freedomainradio.com/...iage_Partners_Study.pdf
-> Page 19-25. Especially Page 24-25 is quite relevant.

www.everydayhealth.com/.../...eaten-longevity.aspx

medicalxpress.com/.../...partners-linked-drug.html

news-releases.uiowa.edu/.../061411paik_study.html

www.barbararisman.com/.../...earch_final_paper.pdf

www.ideals.illinois.edu/.../Saroj_Hardit.pdf
-> Promiscuity is linked to sexual aggression.
-> Page 59. "The number of sexual partners was positively related to parental violence."
-> Page 70. "As the number of sexual partners increased, so did the propensity to sexually aggression."

https://www.bradley.edu/dotAsset/165862.pdf
-> Page 4. "Perhaps the strongest personality correlate of risky sexual behaviour is impulsive sensation-seeking"
-> Page 8. Promiscuous people are more likely to be impulsive, have low agreeableness, low conscientiousness, sensation-seeking and a higher level of sexual infidelity.
-> Page 14. "People who describe themselves as more unfaithful tend to have personality traits linked to a lack of trust and empathy (i. e. low agreeableness)"

www.sociopathicstyle.com/psychopathic-traits/
-> Point 11. Promiscuity is a common symptom of psychopathy. Goes hand in hand with the other study mentioning impulsiveness as it shows it here on point 14.

ink. library. smu. edu. sg/cgi/viewcontent. cgi? article=2215&context=soss_research
-> Page 8. Higher amount of sexual partners is directly linked to higher degrees of psychopathy, narcissism, machiavellianism and an increase of any combination of those 3.

genepi.qimr.edu.au/.../CV262Bailey_UQ_Copy.pdf
-> Page 4, Table 1. (Note: Sociosexuality = Parameter for willingness to engage in sexual activity outside of comitted relationships)

To put it into my own words: I think promiscuity is a symptom of mental instability and is a way of self-destructive behaviour, just like i. e. Obesity (not physical-health induced obesity). It's a huge red flag objectively, biologically and evolutionary for anyone who wants a comitted and successful relationship.
Thus there is no logical argument to me that promiscuity is in any way to be seen as positive and people are naturally repulsed by such unhealthy and self-destructive behaviour.

[front2back]

That's fine if that's your lifestyle. Everyone should be allowed to live their lives how they choose, and we should all at least tolerate their choices, even if we don't like them.

However, why I don't see it as reasonable to treat someone as subhuman for their sexuality, I don't support casual sex either. I see it in the same way I see addictive drugs, it's only done for the thrill and does more harm than good. Therefore, I don't have casual sex, and want a partner who doesn't either. I'm just at the opposite end of your spectrum. I don't think sex is bad either, but I think it's worthless without being with someone you love.

One thing you are wrong on though is "no judging". Humans judge naturally (like they have sex naturally) and you're telling me my natural ways are wrong? Now, judging a whole person by their sex life is stupid, sort of like judging them based on their music traits, but like I said with the "tolerance vs acceptance" thing earlier, you can still be okay with diverse views and lifestyles but still not like them (judging). If humans didn't judge, nothing would get accomplished since we couldn't make any decisions on anything. So judging someone is okay as long as you don't see them as less of a human for being different. Everyone does it, whether it's good or bad.

[Dandeus]

All of your actions and choices reflect who you are as a person, nothing you do is devoid of meaning. Sex is no exception.

Are you free to have sex without whoever you want? Absolutely. I am also free to have sex with whoever I want, and by extension I am free to choose not to have sex with whoever I want. That includes choosing not to have sex with a person because of their sexual values.

A person can either be selective or indiscriminate, not both. You don't get to choose to be one and expect the world to treat you like the other.

[dudeman]

yes a number does reflect who they are or at lease very important parts about them. also yes people should be able to judge whoever they wish to judge. slutty women are simply bad for a civilization. single mamas will be the down fall of our once great civilization know as planet earth.

[genericname85]

i mean as long as you don´t play on other peoples feelings, are open and honest, there´s absolutely no problem with having as manys exual partners as you want.