Let's try and get 1,000,000 replies to this post

Lamia020281 said:
"Sex outside marriage is usually immoral." I don't think anyone has thought so since the 1950s. Really absurd concept really.
Click to expand...
You should have met my mother. Actually no, her take would have been "always completely immoral to the point of being horrifying" :confused:
Lamia020281 said:
"Mothers may have careers, but their first duty is to be homemakers." Say that here publicly and you'll be lynched. :p
Click to expand...
Hurrah for that anyway. But again my mother would have agreed with the sentiment. She considered my relationship with the Boyfriend to be highly unusual and although he has made it clear he is quite happy doing all the cooking and the food shopping (and is actually quite worried about "his kitchen" if I feel like having a go :lol:) she was always trying to convince me that one day he would begin to resent me for failing to take up my God-given responsibilities ...
 
Saapanael said:
Every time I start a topic here, I immediately regret it afterwards. Go and have sex as much as you want, I don't care.
Click to expand...
You know, I went into a relationship with my wife when we turned 16, and have been since. We are 30 now and got married at 26 on the day of our 10th anniversary. It would have been a boring 10 years had we waited...
 
Okay, screw the word marriage. I just thought it would be nice if people who had feelings for each other did it, not something for horny schoolboys to boast about. What a boring conversation, let's just drop it. I'm sorry, my nerves are fucked up lately.
 
Saapanael said:
Okay, screw the word marriage. I just thought it would be nice if people who had feelings for each other did it, not something for horny schoolboys to boast about. What a boring conversation, let's just drop it. I'm sorry, my nerves are fucked up lately.
Click to expand...
I think...there's a much deeper conversation to be had here.
Yax said:
You know, I went into a relationship with my wife when we turned 16,
Click to expand...
I misread that at first, missed the "a relationship with" part...
 
Saapanael said:
Okay, screw the word marriage. I just thought it would be nice if people who had feelings for each other did it, not something for horny schoolboys to boast about. What a boring conversation, let's just drop it. I'm sorry, my nerves are fucked up lately.
Click to expand...
I understand what you're saying. I don't agree with most of it, but I get it. For me, I'd rather enjoy a person for who they are than just have sex with them. But other people don't need that, and that's fine. It's up to them. I don't find it or the talking about it immoral because the morality spectrum has more nuance to it than people think IMO.

But at the same time I also hate how people refer to the people they've fucked as "bodies". It feels really creepy and demeaning. But maybe that's just me.

To be clear: I voted strongly disagree. Sex before marriage is not immoral at all in my mind and also I've done it so why should I judge anyone else lmao.
 
Blaming me for seeing sexism where you think there is none is just another proof.

Also, my reaction had nothing to do with "training wheels", even though I think this is a load of crap in itself. What is sexist is that you (or whoever else) thinks it's fine to judge a woman by the number of sexual partners she has had. One is poor, seven is eyebrow-raising material? Oh, get lost!
 
Ariana said:
Blaming me for seeing sexism where you think there is none is just another proof.
Click to expand...
If it applies to men and women equally, it is by definition not sexist, regardless of whether you agree with the opinion or not. There is no “proof” outside of your own incorrect inference here, but your need to apply negative labels to me will probably prevent you from acknowledging that.
 
I’m getting an ad to a book called “Tipp-topp tupp”, which translates to something like “A Great Pussy”.

Before yesterday I thought the forum has really sucked lately, and now I’ve made it worse. :facepalm: I need a break.
 
Jer said:
If it applies to men and women equally, it is by definition not sexist, regardless of whether you agree with the opinion or not. There is no “proof” outside of your own incorrect inference here, but your need to apply negative labels to me will probably prevent you from acknowledging that.
Click to expand...

It's not sexist but it's odd.
Where does that standard of half-dozen come from?

For instance if you had sex with three people at your 19 y.o.a. that could very easily mean you were just in normal relationships. By your limits a moral person has already exhausted half of the sex lot while not even being in the 20s when the real fun starts? Nah.

There's real promiscuity and there are phases while growing up. People actually don't grow up until mid to late 20s. Let people have fun while it's inconsequential.
 
Zare said:
It's not sexist but it's odd.
Click to expand...
It was sexist because he was talking about women only in his post. Nothing to refer to men at all. He could have said people in general if that's what he meant but he didn't. He could have also corrected himself or whatever, but he preferred to toss the ball in my court, saying it's my fault and I'm imagining things. Sure, whatever.

Also, I find the concept of "training wheels" very weird for somebody's sexual experience. Sex is above all about chemistry and finding a good fit for a partner. You may have gained all the experience you feel makes you a demigod in bed, but your next partner happens to like none of it because they have a very different style and preferences. What then?
 
Ariana said:
It was sexist because he was talking about women only in his post.
Click to expand...

Jer corrected it later to unisex, and that's what I was replying to, cause I'm still wondering why is the number of partners important at all, and why do people draw these arbitrary lines (even if it's unisex approach)

Ariana said:
Also, I find the concept of "training wheels" ...
Click to expand...

I find it extremely cringeworthy, from the wider concept to that particular phrase.
 
Zare said:
Jer corrected it later to unisex, and that's what I was replying to, cause I'm still wondering why is the number of partners important at all, and why do people draw these arbitrary lines (even if it's unisex approach)
Click to expand...
Regarding the number of partners, I fully agree with you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top