comment
stringlengths 1
9.49k
| context
sequencelengths 0
760
|
|---|---|
>
Clothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.
Not everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it."
] |
>
Good point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked) | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with."
] |
>
So if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself? | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)"
] |
>
There is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going "you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners".
Also, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.
We don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.
I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.
You're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.
Sex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going "hey, do you want to do thing C?" and both party A and party B going "yes, I would enjoy that". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go "that was fun". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.
Now, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?"
] |
>
Talk ur shit!! | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much."
] |
>
I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.
That's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!"
] |
>
it is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem"
] |
>
Also, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.
Why does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain"
] |
>
Probably because it focuses on hedonism | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other."
] |
>
Repeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism"
] |
>
I think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad."
] |
>
People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress "slutty"
But why / how?
And why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'?
It's "being used" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) "use" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard? | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives."
] |
>
"women that dress "provocatively" are ...................... more prone to be raped"
Wrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions
"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves"
Not a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one "right" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.
"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used."
It is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?"
] |
>
∆
You have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the "passive" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.
And that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal) | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth."
] |
>
Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).
^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)"
] |
>
“More prone to be raped”
Rapist rape children in diapers bro.
If someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards"
] |
>
Yes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.
When I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere."
] |
>
They made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then.
Today with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture."
] |
>
Okay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal."
] |
>
Because unwanted pregnancies only happened to women.
You gotta remember we're talking about a time when starvation and plague (from things that we can easily cure today) was an everyday thing. Getting pregnant from some random dude was very bad. You might die in childbirth. If you don't you're unlikely to have the means to take care of the kid. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal.",
">\n\nOkay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's."
] |
>
There were ways to have abortions and they were used. Don't forget during the time the bible was made an abortion could be ordered on the husband's say so. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal.",
">\n\nOkay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's.",
">\n\nBecause unwanted pregnancies only happened to women. \nYou gotta remember we're talking about a time when starvation and plague (from things that we can easily cure today) was an everyday thing. Getting pregnant from some random dude was very bad. You might die in childbirth. If you don't you're unlikely to have the means to take care of the kid."
] |
>
A person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them.
Sure, and this is only an issue if you believe that this intimate part is somehow "sacred" and/or "gets damaged" by continuous use.
Also, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.
And people do superficial things for pleasure - why it is inherently bad? If I f.ex. go to a board game pub and play a round of a game with a complete rando and then go away - I did the same, I never valued that personal relationship, it was superficial and I did it for pleasure - cause I wanted to play a game. Would that mean that someone who is frequenting a board game pub does not value themselves?
I think that shows that only reason for this whole "don't value themselves" comes strictly from seeing sex as some kind of sacred union between two chosen people.
I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body.
You are slightly overexaggerating to feel better about an argument. Promiscuous people don't let "everyone" do "whatever" to their body - they let selected people do exactly what they want to their body.
They are letting themselves be used.
And "use" other people, that is how this works - that is how every single human-human relation works. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal.",
">\n\nOkay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's.",
">\n\nBecause unwanted pregnancies only happened to women. \nYou gotta remember we're talking about a time when starvation and plague (from things that we can easily cure today) was an everyday thing. Getting pregnant from some random dude was very bad. You might die in childbirth. If you don't you're unlikely to have the means to take care of the kid.",
">\n\nThere were ways to have abortions and they were used. Don't forget during the time the bible was made an abortion could be ordered on the husband's say so."
] |
>
People that go out and play casual board games with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected.
A person that plays board games with many people lends their time and company to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them. Also, casual game playing behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think casual board game players have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their time and company. They are letting themselves be used. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal.",
">\n\nOkay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's.",
">\n\nBecause unwanted pregnancies only happened to women. \nYou gotta remember we're talking about a time when starvation and plague (from things that we can easily cure today) was an everyday thing. Getting pregnant from some random dude was very bad. You might die in childbirth. If you don't you're unlikely to have the means to take care of the kid.",
">\n\nThere were ways to have abortions and they were used. Don't forget during the time the bible was made an abortion could be ordered on the husband's say so.",
">\n\n\nA person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them.\n\nSure, and this is only an issue if you believe that this intimate part is somehow \"sacred\" and/or \"gets damaged\" by continuous use.\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nAnd people do superficial things for pleasure - why it is inherently bad? If I f.ex. go to a board game pub and play a round of a game with a complete rando and then go away - I did the same, I never valued that personal relationship, it was superficial and I did it for pleasure - cause I wanted to play a game. Would that mean that someone who is frequenting a board game pub does not value themselves?\nI think that shows that only reason for this whole \"don't value themselves\" comes strictly from seeing sex as some kind of sacred union between two chosen people.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\n\nYou are slightly overexaggerating to feel better about an argument. Promiscuous people don't let \"everyone\" do \"whatever\" to their body - they let selected people do exactly what they want to their body.\n\nThey are letting themselves be used.\n\nAnd \"use\" other people, that is how this works - that is how every single human-human relation works."
] |
>
And it comes further, this makes people believe they can take advantage of others with similar behaviors. Such as lurking in board game pubs and preying on those who were led into thinking that lifestyle is cool, buying them few drinks and then, my God, playing "Monopoly" with them. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal.",
">\n\nOkay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's.",
">\n\nBecause unwanted pregnancies only happened to women. \nYou gotta remember we're talking about a time when starvation and plague (from things that we can easily cure today) was an everyday thing. Getting pregnant from some random dude was very bad. You might die in childbirth. If you don't you're unlikely to have the means to take care of the kid.",
">\n\nThere were ways to have abortions and they were used. Don't forget during the time the bible was made an abortion could be ordered on the husband's say so.",
">\n\n\nA person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them.\n\nSure, and this is only an issue if you believe that this intimate part is somehow \"sacred\" and/or \"gets damaged\" by continuous use.\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nAnd people do superficial things for pleasure - why it is inherently bad? If I f.ex. go to a board game pub and play a round of a game with a complete rando and then go away - I did the same, I never valued that personal relationship, it was superficial and I did it for pleasure - cause I wanted to play a game. Would that mean that someone who is frequenting a board game pub does not value themselves?\nI think that shows that only reason for this whole \"don't value themselves\" comes strictly from seeing sex as some kind of sacred union between two chosen people.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\n\nYou are slightly overexaggerating to feel better about an argument. Promiscuous people don't let \"everyone\" do \"whatever\" to their body - they let selected people do exactly what they want to their body.\n\nThey are letting themselves be used.\n\nAnd \"use\" other people, that is how this works - that is how every single human-human relation works.",
">\n\nPeople that go out and play casual board games with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected.\nA person that plays board games with many people lends their time and company to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them. Also, casual game playing behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think casual board game players have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their time and company. They are letting themselves be used."
] |
>
Casual sex doesn't have to be as hedonistic as you're describing it to be. For some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.
But casual sex can also be done safely and healthily. Viewing sex as a sacred thing doesn't mean it can only be experienced that way in a fulfilling monogamous relationship (though that is a great place for it). One can also have a "sacred" sexual experience casually, as it's just another way to explore their sexuality, which is an important part of what it means to be human.
Sometimes a deep romantic relationship just isn't in the cards for someone because of the place they're at in life or whatever reason. But they still, if they want to in the meantime, ought to have some way to have sexual experiences and fulfill that part of them. Or maybe they're not looking for a romantic relationship in general.
And it's not simply "letting everyone to do whatever they want with their body." Having the autonomy to choose to engage in casual sex and give someone access to them in a sexual way I believe can be more empowering than maybe you realize.
As long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and "disrespectful" to oneself to have casual sex. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal.",
">\n\nOkay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's.",
">\n\nBecause unwanted pregnancies only happened to women. \nYou gotta remember we're talking about a time when starvation and plague (from things that we can easily cure today) was an everyday thing. Getting pregnant from some random dude was very bad. You might die in childbirth. If you don't you're unlikely to have the means to take care of the kid.",
">\n\nThere were ways to have abortions and they were used. Don't forget during the time the bible was made an abortion could be ordered on the husband's say so.",
">\n\n\nA person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them.\n\nSure, and this is only an issue if you believe that this intimate part is somehow \"sacred\" and/or \"gets damaged\" by continuous use.\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nAnd people do superficial things for pleasure - why it is inherently bad? If I f.ex. go to a board game pub and play a round of a game with a complete rando and then go away - I did the same, I never valued that personal relationship, it was superficial and I did it for pleasure - cause I wanted to play a game. Would that mean that someone who is frequenting a board game pub does not value themselves?\nI think that shows that only reason for this whole \"don't value themselves\" comes strictly from seeing sex as some kind of sacred union between two chosen people.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\n\nYou are slightly overexaggerating to feel better about an argument. Promiscuous people don't let \"everyone\" do \"whatever\" to their body - they let selected people do exactly what they want to their body.\n\nThey are letting themselves be used.\n\nAnd \"use\" other people, that is how this works - that is how every single human-human relation works.",
">\n\nPeople that go out and play casual board games with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected.\nA person that plays board games with many people lends their time and company to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them. Also, casual game playing behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think casual board game players have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their time and company. They are letting themselves be used.",
">\n\nAnd it comes further, this makes people believe they can take advantage of others with similar behaviors. Such as lurking in board game pubs and preying on those who were led into thinking that lifestyle is cool, buying them few drinks and then, my God, playing \"Monopoly\" with them."
] |
>
∆
For some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.
I was probably focusing too much on that part that I forgot that not everyone does it with the same purpose or that there's something bad with them.
As long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and "disrespectful" to oneself to have casual sex.
And that's what I thought before my friend changed my mind (that resulted in this post). Everyone can do whatever they want with their lives as long as it doesn't impact someone else negatively. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal.",
">\n\nOkay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's.",
">\n\nBecause unwanted pregnancies only happened to women. \nYou gotta remember we're talking about a time when starvation and plague (from things that we can easily cure today) was an everyday thing. Getting pregnant from some random dude was very bad. You might die in childbirth. If you don't you're unlikely to have the means to take care of the kid.",
">\n\nThere were ways to have abortions and they were used. Don't forget during the time the bible was made an abortion could be ordered on the husband's say so.",
">\n\n\nA person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them.\n\nSure, and this is only an issue if you believe that this intimate part is somehow \"sacred\" and/or \"gets damaged\" by continuous use.\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nAnd people do superficial things for pleasure - why it is inherently bad? If I f.ex. go to a board game pub and play a round of a game with a complete rando and then go away - I did the same, I never valued that personal relationship, it was superficial and I did it for pleasure - cause I wanted to play a game. Would that mean that someone who is frequenting a board game pub does not value themselves?\nI think that shows that only reason for this whole \"don't value themselves\" comes strictly from seeing sex as some kind of sacred union between two chosen people.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\n\nYou are slightly overexaggerating to feel better about an argument. Promiscuous people don't let \"everyone\" do \"whatever\" to their body - they let selected people do exactly what they want to their body.\n\nThey are letting themselves be used.\n\nAnd \"use\" other people, that is how this works - that is how every single human-human relation works.",
">\n\nPeople that go out and play casual board games with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected.\nA person that plays board games with many people lends their time and company to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them. Also, casual game playing behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think casual board game players have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their time and company. They are letting themselves be used.",
">\n\nAnd it comes further, this makes people believe they can take advantage of others with similar behaviors. Such as lurking in board game pubs and preying on those who were led into thinking that lifestyle is cool, buying them few drinks and then, my God, playing \"Monopoly\" with them.",
">\n\nCasual sex doesn't have to be as hedonistic as you're describing it to be. For some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\nBut casual sex can also be done safely and healthily. Viewing sex as a sacred thing doesn't mean it can only be experienced that way in a fulfilling monogamous relationship (though that is a great place for it). One can also have a \"sacred\" sexual experience casually, as it's just another way to explore their sexuality, which is an important part of what it means to be human. \nSometimes a deep romantic relationship just isn't in the cards for someone because of the place they're at in life or whatever reason. But they still, if they want to in the meantime, ought to have some way to have sexual experiences and fulfill that part of them. Or maybe they're not looking for a romantic relationship in general. \nAnd it's not simply \"letting everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\" Having the autonomy to choose to engage in casual sex and give someone access to them in a sexual way I believe can be more empowering than maybe you realize. \nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex."
] |
>
Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Mundane-Magazine-229 (1∆).
^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal.",
">\n\nOkay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's.",
">\n\nBecause unwanted pregnancies only happened to women. \nYou gotta remember we're talking about a time when starvation and plague (from things that we can easily cure today) was an everyday thing. Getting pregnant from some random dude was very bad. You might die in childbirth. If you don't you're unlikely to have the means to take care of the kid.",
">\n\nThere were ways to have abortions and they were used. Don't forget during the time the bible was made an abortion could be ordered on the husband's say so.",
">\n\n\nA person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them.\n\nSure, and this is only an issue if you believe that this intimate part is somehow \"sacred\" and/or \"gets damaged\" by continuous use.\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nAnd people do superficial things for pleasure - why it is inherently bad? If I f.ex. go to a board game pub and play a round of a game with a complete rando and then go away - I did the same, I never valued that personal relationship, it was superficial and I did it for pleasure - cause I wanted to play a game. Would that mean that someone who is frequenting a board game pub does not value themselves?\nI think that shows that only reason for this whole \"don't value themselves\" comes strictly from seeing sex as some kind of sacred union between two chosen people.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\n\nYou are slightly overexaggerating to feel better about an argument. Promiscuous people don't let \"everyone\" do \"whatever\" to their body - they let selected people do exactly what they want to their body.\n\nThey are letting themselves be used.\n\nAnd \"use\" other people, that is how this works - that is how every single human-human relation works.",
">\n\nPeople that go out and play casual board games with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected.\nA person that plays board games with many people lends their time and company to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them. Also, casual game playing behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think casual board game players have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their time and company. They are letting themselves be used.",
">\n\nAnd it comes further, this makes people believe they can take advantage of others with similar behaviors. Such as lurking in board game pubs and preying on those who were led into thinking that lifestyle is cool, buying them few drinks and then, my God, playing \"Monopoly\" with them.",
">\n\nCasual sex doesn't have to be as hedonistic as you're describing it to be. For some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\nBut casual sex can also be done safely and healthily. Viewing sex as a sacred thing doesn't mean it can only be experienced that way in a fulfilling monogamous relationship (though that is a great place for it). One can also have a \"sacred\" sexual experience casually, as it's just another way to explore their sexuality, which is an important part of what it means to be human. \nSometimes a deep romantic relationship just isn't in the cards for someone because of the place they're at in life or whatever reason. But they still, if they want to in the meantime, ought to have some way to have sexual experiences and fulfill that part of them. Or maybe they're not looking for a romantic relationship in general. \nAnd it's not simply \"letting everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\" Having the autonomy to choose to engage in casual sex and give someone access to them in a sexual way I believe can be more empowering than maybe you realize. \nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.",
">\n\n∆\n\nFor some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\n\nI was probably focusing too much on that part that I forgot that not everyone does it with the same purpose or that there's something bad with them.\n\nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.\n\nAnd that's what I thought before my friend changed my mind (that resulted in this post). Everyone can do whatever they want with their lives as long as it doesn't impact someone else negatively."
] |
>
I say "people" because this goes for men as well, I think they disrespect themselves, but since society rewards men for sleeping with many women and punishes women for sleeping with many men, they don't make other men look bad like women do.
Why should the fact that society slut-shames women make promiscuity more acceptable for men?
I suspect it's more that you say "people" rather than "women" because if you explicitly target women with this criticism it's more obviously misogynist. This is further evidenced by phrases like "letting themselves be used," which typically is applied only to women by people who believe men are the only ones with sexual agency. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal.",
">\n\nOkay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's.",
">\n\nBecause unwanted pregnancies only happened to women. \nYou gotta remember we're talking about a time when starvation and plague (from things that we can easily cure today) was an everyday thing. Getting pregnant from some random dude was very bad. You might die in childbirth. If you don't you're unlikely to have the means to take care of the kid.",
">\n\nThere were ways to have abortions and they were used. Don't forget during the time the bible was made an abortion could be ordered on the husband's say so.",
">\n\n\nA person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them.\n\nSure, and this is only an issue if you believe that this intimate part is somehow \"sacred\" and/or \"gets damaged\" by continuous use.\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nAnd people do superficial things for pleasure - why it is inherently bad? If I f.ex. go to a board game pub and play a round of a game with a complete rando and then go away - I did the same, I never valued that personal relationship, it was superficial and I did it for pleasure - cause I wanted to play a game. Would that mean that someone who is frequenting a board game pub does not value themselves?\nI think that shows that only reason for this whole \"don't value themselves\" comes strictly from seeing sex as some kind of sacred union between two chosen people.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\n\nYou are slightly overexaggerating to feel better about an argument. Promiscuous people don't let \"everyone\" do \"whatever\" to their body - they let selected people do exactly what they want to their body.\n\nThey are letting themselves be used.\n\nAnd \"use\" other people, that is how this works - that is how every single human-human relation works.",
">\n\nPeople that go out and play casual board games with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected.\nA person that plays board games with many people lends their time and company to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them. Also, casual game playing behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think casual board game players have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their time and company. They are letting themselves be used.",
">\n\nAnd it comes further, this makes people believe they can take advantage of others with similar behaviors. Such as lurking in board game pubs and preying on those who were led into thinking that lifestyle is cool, buying them few drinks and then, my God, playing \"Monopoly\" with them.",
">\n\nCasual sex doesn't have to be as hedonistic as you're describing it to be. For some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\nBut casual sex can also be done safely and healthily. Viewing sex as a sacred thing doesn't mean it can only be experienced that way in a fulfilling monogamous relationship (though that is a great place for it). One can also have a \"sacred\" sexual experience casually, as it's just another way to explore their sexuality, which is an important part of what it means to be human. \nSometimes a deep romantic relationship just isn't in the cards for someone because of the place they're at in life or whatever reason. But they still, if they want to in the meantime, ought to have some way to have sexual experiences and fulfill that part of them. Or maybe they're not looking for a romantic relationship in general. \nAnd it's not simply \"letting everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\" Having the autonomy to choose to engage in casual sex and give someone access to them in a sexual way I believe can be more empowering than maybe you realize. \nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.",
">\n\n∆\n\nFor some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\n\nI was probably focusing too much on that part that I forgot that not everyone does it with the same purpose or that there's something bad with them.\n\nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.\n\nAnd that's what I thought before my friend changed my mind (that resulted in this post). Everyone can do whatever they want with their lives as long as it doesn't impact someone else negatively.",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Mundane-Magazine-229 (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards"
] |
>
I'll go in more depth, but first which joyless humanity despising religious tradition are you part of? | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal.",
">\n\nOkay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's.",
">\n\nBecause unwanted pregnancies only happened to women. \nYou gotta remember we're talking about a time when starvation and plague (from things that we can easily cure today) was an everyday thing. Getting pregnant from some random dude was very bad. You might die in childbirth. If you don't you're unlikely to have the means to take care of the kid.",
">\n\nThere were ways to have abortions and they were used. Don't forget during the time the bible was made an abortion could be ordered on the husband's say so.",
">\n\n\nA person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them.\n\nSure, and this is only an issue if you believe that this intimate part is somehow \"sacred\" and/or \"gets damaged\" by continuous use.\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nAnd people do superficial things for pleasure - why it is inherently bad? If I f.ex. go to a board game pub and play a round of a game with a complete rando and then go away - I did the same, I never valued that personal relationship, it was superficial and I did it for pleasure - cause I wanted to play a game. Would that mean that someone who is frequenting a board game pub does not value themselves?\nI think that shows that only reason for this whole \"don't value themselves\" comes strictly from seeing sex as some kind of sacred union between two chosen people.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\n\nYou are slightly overexaggerating to feel better about an argument. Promiscuous people don't let \"everyone\" do \"whatever\" to their body - they let selected people do exactly what they want to their body.\n\nThey are letting themselves be used.\n\nAnd \"use\" other people, that is how this works - that is how every single human-human relation works.",
">\n\nPeople that go out and play casual board games with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected.\nA person that plays board games with many people lends their time and company to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them. Also, casual game playing behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think casual board game players have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their time and company. They are letting themselves be used.",
">\n\nAnd it comes further, this makes people believe they can take advantage of others with similar behaviors. Such as lurking in board game pubs and preying on those who were led into thinking that lifestyle is cool, buying them few drinks and then, my God, playing \"Monopoly\" with them.",
">\n\nCasual sex doesn't have to be as hedonistic as you're describing it to be. For some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\nBut casual sex can also be done safely and healthily. Viewing sex as a sacred thing doesn't mean it can only be experienced that way in a fulfilling monogamous relationship (though that is a great place for it). One can also have a \"sacred\" sexual experience casually, as it's just another way to explore their sexuality, which is an important part of what it means to be human. \nSometimes a deep romantic relationship just isn't in the cards for someone because of the place they're at in life or whatever reason. But they still, if they want to in the meantime, ought to have some way to have sexual experiences and fulfill that part of them. Or maybe they're not looking for a romantic relationship in general. \nAnd it's not simply \"letting everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\" Having the autonomy to choose to engage in casual sex and give someone access to them in a sexual way I believe can be more empowering than maybe you realize. \nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.",
">\n\n∆\n\nFor some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\n\nI was probably focusing too much on that part that I forgot that not everyone does it with the same purpose or that there's something bad with them.\n\nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.\n\nAnd that's what I thought before my friend changed my mind (that resulted in this post). Everyone can do whatever they want with their lives as long as it doesn't impact someone else negatively.",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Mundane-Magazine-229 (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n\nI say \"people\" because this goes for men as well, I think they disrespect themselves, but since society rewards men for sleeping with many women and punishes women for sleeping with many men, they don't make other men look bad like women do.\n\nWhy should the fact that society slut-shames women make promiscuity more acceptable for men?\nI suspect it's more that you say \"people\" rather than \"women\" because if you explicitly target women with this criticism it's more obviously misogynist. This is further evidenced by phrases like \"letting themselves be used,\" which typically is applied only to women by people who believe men are the only ones with sexual agency."
] |
>
I was raised in a christian household, thankfully not too extreme. This post came from the idea my friend gave me while discussing that convinced me because I couldn't find a better answer (that's why I made this post). She's christian as well, and more extreme. We usually disagree about our views and it's very rare of me to change my mind, but the argument trapped me.
In fact I'm non-religious and the "people can do whatever they want if they like it and it's fine" type of person. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal.",
">\n\nOkay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's.",
">\n\nBecause unwanted pregnancies only happened to women. \nYou gotta remember we're talking about a time when starvation and plague (from things that we can easily cure today) was an everyday thing. Getting pregnant from some random dude was very bad. You might die in childbirth. If you don't you're unlikely to have the means to take care of the kid.",
">\n\nThere were ways to have abortions and they were used. Don't forget during the time the bible was made an abortion could be ordered on the husband's say so.",
">\n\n\nA person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them.\n\nSure, and this is only an issue if you believe that this intimate part is somehow \"sacred\" and/or \"gets damaged\" by continuous use.\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nAnd people do superficial things for pleasure - why it is inherently bad? If I f.ex. go to a board game pub and play a round of a game with a complete rando and then go away - I did the same, I never valued that personal relationship, it was superficial and I did it for pleasure - cause I wanted to play a game. Would that mean that someone who is frequenting a board game pub does not value themselves?\nI think that shows that only reason for this whole \"don't value themselves\" comes strictly from seeing sex as some kind of sacred union between two chosen people.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\n\nYou are slightly overexaggerating to feel better about an argument. Promiscuous people don't let \"everyone\" do \"whatever\" to their body - they let selected people do exactly what they want to their body.\n\nThey are letting themselves be used.\n\nAnd \"use\" other people, that is how this works - that is how every single human-human relation works.",
">\n\nPeople that go out and play casual board games with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected.\nA person that plays board games with many people lends their time and company to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them. Also, casual game playing behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think casual board game players have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their time and company. They are letting themselves be used.",
">\n\nAnd it comes further, this makes people believe they can take advantage of others with similar behaviors. Such as lurking in board game pubs and preying on those who were led into thinking that lifestyle is cool, buying them few drinks and then, my God, playing \"Monopoly\" with them.",
">\n\nCasual sex doesn't have to be as hedonistic as you're describing it to be. For some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\nBut casual sex can also be done safely and healthily. Viewing sex as a sacred thing doesn't mean it can only be experienced that way in a fulfilling monogamous relationship (though that is a great place for it). One can also have a \"sacred\" sexual experience casually, as it's just another way to explore their sexuality, which is an important part of what it means to be human. \nSometimes a deep romantic relationship just isn't in the cards for someone because of the place they're at in life or whatever reason. But they still, if they want to in the meantime, ought to have some way to have sexual experiences and fulfill that part of them. Or maybe they're not looking for a romantic relationship in general. \nAnd it's not simply \"letting everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\" Having the autonomy to choose to engage in casual sex and give someone access to them in a sexual way I believe can be more empowering than maybe you realize. \nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.",
">\n\n∆\n\nFor some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\n\nI was probably focusing too much on that part that I forgot that not everyone does it with the same purpose or that there's something bad with them.\n\nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.\n\nAnd that's what I thought before my friend changed my mind (that resulted in this post). Everyone can do whatever they want with their lives as long as it doesn't impact someone else negatively.",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Mundane-Magazine-229 (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n\nI say \"people\" because this goes for men as well, I think they disrespect themselves, but since society rewards men for sleeping with many women and punishes women for sleeping with many men, they don't make other men look bad like women do.\n\nWhy should the fact that society slut-shames women make promiscuity more acceptable for men?\nI suspect it's more that you say \"people\" rather than \"women\" because if you explicitly target women with this criticism it's more obviously misogynist. This is further evidenced by phrases like \"letting themselves be used,\" which typically is applied only to women by people who believe men are the only ones with sexual agency.",
">\n\nI'll go in more depth, but first which joyless humanity despising religious tradition are you part of?"
] |
>
People "value themselves" in relation to whatever values they hold, and, in a pluralistic society, people subscribe to different, and even contradictory, values: both a pacifist and a soldier are "valuing themselves," even if one would find the other immoral, because they are doing the right thing (or at least not something objectionable) relative to their own values.
Likewise, the people who do have frequent casual sex and the other who only have it within the context of a relationship can both be "valuing themselves," insofar that they likely have different values they are abiding by. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal.",
">\n\nOkay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's.",
">\n\nBecause unwanted pregnancies only happened to women. \nYou gotta remember we're talking about a time when starvation and plague (from things that we can easily cure today) was an everyday thing. Getting pregnant from some random dude was very bad. You might die in childbirth. If you don't you're unlikely to have the means to take care of the kid.",
">\n\nThere were ways to have abortions and they were used. Don't forget during the time the bible was made an abortion could be ordered on the husband's say so.",
">\n\n\nA person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them.\n\nSure, and this is only an issue if you believe that this intimate part is somehow \"sacred\" and/or \"gets damaged\" by continuous use.\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nAnd people do superficial things for pleasure - why it is inherently bad? If I f.ex. go to a board game pub and play a round of a game with a complete rando and then go away - I did the same, I never valued that personal relationship, it was superficial and I did it for pleasure - cause I wanted to play a game. Would that mean that someone who is frequenting a board game pub does not value themselves?\nI think that shows that only reason for this whole \"don't value themselves\" comes strictly from seeing sex as some kind of sacred union between two chosen people.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\n\nYou are slightly overexaggerating to feel better about an argument. Promiscuous people don't let \"everyone\" do \"whatever\" to their body - they let selected people do exactly what they want to their body.\n\nThey are letting themselves be used.\n\nAnd \"use\" other people, that is how this works - that is how every single human-human relation works.",
">\n\nPeople that go out and play casual board games with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected.\nA person that plays board games with many people lends their time and company to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them. Also, casual game playing behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think casual board game players have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their time and company. They are letting themselves be used.",
">\n\nAnd it comes further, this makes people believe they can take advantage of others with similar behaviors. Such as lurking in board game pubs and preying on those who were led into thinking that lifestyle is cool, buying them few drinks and then, my God, playing \"Monopoly\" with them.",
">\n\nCasual sex doesn't have to be as hedonistic as you're describing it to be. For some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\nBut casual sex can also be done safely and healthily. Viewing sex as a sacred thing doesn't mean it can only be experienced that way in a fulfilling monogamous relationship (though that is a great place for it). One can also have a \"sacred\" sexual experience casually, as it's just another way to explore their sexuality, which is an important part of what it means to be human. \nSometimes a deep romantic relationship just isn't in the cards for someone because of the place they're at in life or whatever reason. But they still, if they want to in the meantime, ought to have some way to have sexual experiences and fulfill that part of them. Or maybe they're not looking for a romantic relationship in general. \nAnd it's not simply \"letting everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\" Having the autonomy to choose to engage in casual sex and give someone access to them in a sexual way I believe can be more empowering than maybe you realize. \nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.",
">\n\n∆\n\nFor some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\n\nI was probably focusing too much on that part that I forgot that not everyone does it with the same purpose or that there's something bad with them.\n\nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.\n\nAnd that's what I thought before my friend changed my mind (that resulted in this post). Everyone can do whatever they want with their lives as long as it doesn't impact someone else negatively.",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Mundane-Magazine-229 (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n\nI say \"people\" because this goes for men as well, I think they disrespect themselves, but since society rewards men for sleeping with many women and punishes women for sleeping with many men, they don't make other men look bad like women do.\n\nWhy should the fact that society slut-shames women make promiscuity more acceptable for men?\nI suspect it's more that you say \"people\" rather than \"women\" because if you explicitly target women with this criticism it's more obviously misogynist. This is further evidenced by phrases like \"letting themselves be used,\" which typically is applied only to women by people who believe men are the only ones with sexual agency.",
">\n\nI'll go in more depth, but first which joyless humanity despising religious tradition are you part of?",
">\n\nI was raised in a christian household, thankfully not too extreme. This post came from the idea my friend gave me while discussing that convinced me because I couldn't find a better answer (that's why I made this post). She's christian as well, and more extreme. We usually disagree about our views and it's very rare of me to change my mind, but the argument trapped me.\nIn fact I'm non-religious and the \"people can do whatever they want if they like it and it's fine\" type of person."
] |
>
it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure
Let's say Bob has a distance relationship with Dee. For practical reasons, they decide to be polyamorous, as they and their long distance partner don't have the means to travel often, and they want physical intimacy more often than they can meet up.
If Bob meets someone local, they've got a baseline of what good treatment is from Bob's relationship with Dee. So, they are more likely to have the confidence and self-respect, if faced from abuse or disrespect from a local prospective partner, to walk away.
Someone who is monogamous could be easier to be convinced that they have no other options and have to settle for an abusive partner who "cares" about them.
I know several poly people, and I don't think they're more superficial than other people I know. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal.",
">\n\nOkay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's.",
">\n\nBecause unwanted pregnancies only happened to women. \nYou gotta remember we're talking about a time when starvation and plague (from things that we can easily cure today) was an everyday thing. Getting pregnant from some random dude was very bad. You might die in childbirth. If you don't you're unlikely to have the means to take care of the kid.",
">\n\nThere were ways to have abortions and they were used. Don't forget during the time the bible was made an abortion could be ordered on the husband's say so.",
">\n\n\nA person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them.\n\nSure, and this is only an issue if you believe that this intimate part is somehow \"sacred\" and/or \"gets damaged\" by continuous use.\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nAnd people do superficial things for pleasure - why it is inherently bad? If I f.ex. go to a board game pub and play a round of a game with a complete rando and then go away - I did the same, I never valued that personal relationship, it was superficial and I did it for pleasure - cause I wanted to play a game. Would that mean that someone who is frequenting a board game pub does not value themselves?\nI think that shows that only reason for this whole \"don't value themselves\" comes strictly from seeing sex as some kind of sacred union between two chosen people.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\n\nYou are slightly overexaggerating to feel better about an argument. Promiscuous people don't let \"everyone\" do \"whatever\" to their body - they let selected people do exactly what they want to their body.\n\nThey are letting themselves be used.\n\nAnd \"use\" other people, that is how this works - that is how every single human-human relation works.",
">\n\nPeople that go out and play casual board games with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected.\nA person that plays board games with many people lends their time and company to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them. Also, casual game playing behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think casual board game players have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their time and company. They are letting themselves be used.",
">\n\nAnd it comes further, this makes people believe they can take advantage of others with similar behaviors. Such as lurking in board game pubs and preying on those who were led into thinking that lifestyle is cool, buying them few drinks and then, my God, playing \"Monopoly\" with them.",
">\n\nCasual sex doesn't have to be as hedonistic as you're describing it to be. For some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\nBut casual sex can also be done safely and healthily. Viewing sex as a sacred thing doesn't mean it can only be experienced that way in a fulfilling monogamous relationship (though that is a great place for it). One can also have a \"sacred\" sexual experience casually, as it's just another way to explore their sexuality, which is an important part of what it means to be human. \nSometimes a deep romantic relationship just isn't in the cards for someone because of the place they're at in life or whatever reason. But they still, if they want to in the meantime, ought to have some way to have sexual experiences and fulfill that part of them. Or maybe they're not looking for a romantic relationship in general. \nAnd it's not simply \"letting everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\" Having the autonomy to choose to engage in casual sex and give someone access to them in a sexual way I believe can be more empowering than maybe you realize. \nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.",
">\n\n∆\n\nFor some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\n\nI was probably focusing too much on that part that I forgot that not everyone does it with the same purpose or that there's something bad with them.\n\nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.\n\nAnd that's what I thought before my friend changed my mind (that resulted in this post). Everyone can do whatever they want with their lives as long as it doesn't impact someone else negatively.",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Mundane-Magazine-229 (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n\nI say \"people\" because this goes for men as well, I think they disrespect themselves, but since society rewards men for sleeping with many women and punishes women for sleeping with many men, they don't make other men look bad like women do.\n\nWhy should the fact that society slut-shames women make promiscuity more acceptable for men?\nI suspect it's more that you say \"people\" rather than \"women\" because if you explicitly target women with this criticism it's more obviously misogynist. This is further evidenced by phrases like \"letting themselves be used,\" which typically is applied only to women by people who believe men are the only ones with sexual agency.",
">\n\nI'll go in more depth, but first which joyless humanity despising religious tradition are you part of?",
">\n\nI was raised in a christian household, thankfully not too extreme. This post came from the idea my friend gave me while discussing that convinced me because I couldn't find a better answer (that's why I made this post). She's christian as well, and more extreme. We usually disagree about our views and it's very rare of me to change my mind, but the argument trapped me.\nIn fact I'm non-religious and the \"people can do whatever they want if they like it and it's fine\" type of person.",
">\n\nPeople \"value themselves\" in relation to whatever values they hold, and, in a pluralistic society, people subscribe to different, and even contradictory, values: both a pacifist and a soldier are \"valuing themselves,\" even if one would find the other immoral, because they are doing the right thing (or at least not something objectionable) relative to their own values. \nLikewise, the people who do have frequent casual sex and the other who only have it within the context of a relationship can both be \"valuing themselves,\" insofar that they likely have different values they are abiding by."
] |
>
I am polyamorous. I find this extremely offensive.
I guess that means I value at least a part of myself. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal.",
">\n\nOkay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's.",
">\n\nBecause unwanted pregnancies only happened to women. \nYou gotta remember we're talking about a time when starvation and plague (from things that we can easily cure today) was an everyday thing. Getting pregnant from some random dude was very bad. You might die in childbirth. If you don't you're unlikely to have the means to take care of the kid.",
">\n\nThere were ways to have abortions and they were used. Don't forget during the time the bible was made an abortion could be ordered on the husband's say so.",
">\n\n\nA person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them.\n\nSure, and this is only an issue if you believe that this intimate part is somehow \"sacred\" and/or \"gets damaged\" by continuous use.\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nAnd people do superficial things for pleasure - why it is inherently bad? If I f.ex. go to a board game pub and play a round of a game with a complete rando and then go away - I did the same, I never valued that personal relationship, it was superficial and I did it for pleasure - cause I wanted to play a game. Would that mean that someone who is frequenting a board game pub does not value themselves?\nI think that shows that only reason for this whole \"don't value themselves\" comes strictly from seeing sex as some kind of sacred union between two chosen people.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\n\nYou are slightly overexaggerating to feel better about an argument. Promiscuous people don't let \"everyone\" do \"whatever\" to their body - they let selected people do exactly what they want to their body.\n\nThey are letting themselves be used.\n\nAnd \"use\" other people, that is how this works - that is how every single human-human relation works.",
">\n\nPeople that go out and play casual board games with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected.\nA person that plays board games with many people lends their time and company to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them. Also, casual game playing behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think casual board game players have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their time and company. They are letting themselves be used.",
">\n\nAnd it comes further, this makes people believe they can take advantage of others with similar behaviors. Such as lurking in board game pubs and preying on those who were led into thinking that lifestyle is cool, buying them few drinks and then, my God, playing \"Monopoly\" with them.",
">\n\nCasual sex doesn't have to be as hedonistic as you're describing it to be. For some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\nBut casual sex can also be done safely and healthily. Viewing sex as a sacred thing doesn't mean it can only be experienced that way in a fulfilling monogamous relationship (though that is a great place for it). One can also have a \"sacred\" sexual experience casually, as it's just another way to explore their sexuality, which is an important part of what it means to be human. \nSometimes a deep romantic relationship just isn't in the cards for someone because of the place they're at in life or whatever reason. But they still, if they want to in the meantime, ought to have some way to have sexual experiences and fulfill that part of them. Or maybe they're not looking for a romantic relationship in general. \nAnd it's not simply \"letting everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\" Having the autonomy to choose to engage in casual sex and give someone access to them in a sexual way I believe can be more empowering than maybe you realize. \nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.",
">\n\n∆\n\nFor some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\n\nI was probably focusing too much on that part that I forgot that not everyone does it with the same purpose or that there's something bad with them.\n\nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.\n\nAnd that's what I thought before my friend changed my mind (that resulted in this post). Everyone can do whatever they want with their lives as long as it doesn't impact someone else negatively.",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Mundane-Magazine-229 (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n\nI say \"people\" because this goes for men as well, I think they disrespect themselves, but since society rewards men for sleeping with many women and punishes women for sleeping with many men, they don't make other men look bad like women do.\n\nWhy should the fact that society slut-shames women make promiscuity more acceptable for men?\nI suspect it's more that you say \"people\" rather than \"women\" because if you explicitly target women with this criticism it's more obviously misogynist. This is further evidenced by phrases like \"letting themselves be used,\" which typically is applied only to women by people who believe men are the only ones with sexual agency.",
">\n\nI'll go in more depth, but first which joyless humanity despising religious tradition are you part of?",
">\n\nI was raised in a christian household, thankfully not too extreme. This post came from the idea my friend gave me while discussing that convinced me because I couldn't find a better answer (that's why I made this post). She's christian as well, and more extreme. We usually disagree about our views and it's very rare of me to change my mind, but the argument trapped me.\nIn fact I'm non-religious and the \"people can do whatever they want if they like it and it's fine\" type of person.",
">\n\nPeople \"value themselves\" in relation to whatever values they hold, and, in a pluralistic society, people subscribe to different, and even contradictory, values: both a pacifist and a soldier are \"valuing themselves,\" even if one would find the other immoral, because they are doing the right thing (or at least not something objectionable) relative to their own values. \nLikewise, the people who do have frequent casual sex and the other who only have it within the context of a relationship can both be \"valuing themselves,\" insofar that they likely have different values they are abiding by.",
">\n\n\nit's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure\n\nLet's say Bob has a distance relationship with Dee. For practical reasons, they decide to be polyamorous, as they and their long distance partner don't have the means to travel often, and they want physical intimacy more often than they can meet up.\nIf Bob meets someone local, they've got a baseline of what good treatment is from Bob's relationship with Dee. So, they are more likely to have the confidence and self-respect, if faced from abuse or disrespect from a local prospective partner, to walk away.\nSomeone who is monogamous could be easier to be convinced that they have no other options and have to settle for an abusive partner who \"cares\" about them.\nI know several poly people, and I don't think they're more superficial than other people I know."
] |
>
People don't have to ask you for permission for their sex lives.
They get to make choices that you won't agree with. And they get to ignore your ideas when it come to what they want to do with their life.
if a person wants to wear revealing clothes that's something they can do and it doesn't have any bearing on who they are as a person. If they want to have sex with people that doesn't have any bearing on who they are as a person. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal.",
">\n\nOkay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's.",
">\n\nBecause unwanted pregnancies only happened to women. \nYou gotta remember we're talking about a time when starvation and plague (from things that we can easily cure today) was an everyday thing. Getting pregnant from some random dude was very bad. You might die in childbirth. If you don't you're unlikely to have the means to take care of the kid.",
">\n\nThere were ways to have abortions and they were used. Don't forget during the time the bible was made an abortion could be ordered on the husband's say so.",
">\n\n\nA person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them.\n\nSure, and this is only an issue if you believe that this intimate part is somehow \"sacred\" and/or \"gets damaged\" by continuous use.\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nAnd people do superficial things for pleasure - why it is inherently bad? If I f.ex. go to a board game pub and play a round of a game with a complete rando and then go away - I did the same, I never valued that personal relationship, it was superficial and I did it for pleasure - cause I wanted to play a game. Would that mean that someone who is frequenting a board game pub does not value themselves?\nI think that shows that only reason for this whole \"don't value themselves\" comes strictly from seeing sex as some kind of sacred union between two chosen people.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\n\nYou are slightly overexaggerating to feel better about an argument. Promiscuous people don't let \"everyone\" do \"whatever\" to their body - they let selected people do exactly what they want to their body.\n\nThey are letting themselves be used.\n\nAnd \"use\" other people, that is how this works - that is how every single human-human relation works.",
">\n\nPeople that go out and play casual board games with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected.\nA person that plays board games with many people lends their time and company to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them. Also, casual game playing behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think casual board game players have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their time and company. They are letting themselves be used.",
">\n\nAnd it comes further, this makes people believe they can take advantage of others with similar behaviors. Such as lurking in board game pubs and preying on those who were led into thinking that lifestyle is cool, buying them few drinks and then, my God, playing \"Monopoly\" with them.",
">\n\nCasual sex doesn't have to be as hedonistic as you're describing it to be. For some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\nBut casual sex can also be done safely and healthily. Viewing sex as a sacred thing doesn't mean it can only be experienced that way in a fulfilling monogamous relationship (though that is a great place for it). One can also have a \"sacred\" sexual experience casually, as it's just another way to explore their sexuality, which is an important part of what it means to be human. \nSometimes a deep romantic relationship just isn't in the cards for someone because of the place they're at in life or whatever reason. But they still, if they want to in the meantime, ought to have some way to have sexual experiences and fulfill that part of them. Or maybe they're not looking for a romantic relationship in general. \nAnd it's not simply \"letting everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\" Having the autonomy to choose to engage in casual sex and give someone access to them in a sexual way I believe can be more empowering than maybe you realize. \nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.",
">\n\n∆\n\nFor some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\n\nI was probably focusing too much on that part that I forgot that not everyone does it with the same purpose or that there's something bad with them.\n\nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.\n\nAnd that's what I thought before my friend changed my mind (that resulted in this post). Everyone can do whatever they want with their lives as long as it doesn't impact someone else negatively.",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Mundane-Magazine-229 (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n\nI say \"people\" because this goes for men as well, I think they disrespect themselves, but since society rewards men for sleeping with many women and punishes women for sleeping with many men, they don't make other men look bad like women do.\n\nWhy should the fact that society slut-shames women make promiscuity more acceptable for men?\nI suspect it's more that you say \"people\" rather than \"women\" because if you explicitly target women with this criticism it's more obviously misogynist. This is further evidenced by phrases like \"letting themselves be used,\" which typically is applied only to women by people who believe men are the only ones with sexual agency.",
">\n\nI'll go in more depth, but first which joyless humanity despising religious tradition are you part of?",
">\n\nI was raised in a christian household, thankfully not too extreme. This post came from the idea my friend gave me while discussing that convinced me because I couldn't find a better answer (that's why I made this post). She's christian as well, and more extreme. We usually disagree about our views and it's very rare of me to change my mind, but the argument trapped me.\nIn fact I'm non-religious and the \"people can do whatever they want if they like it and it's fine\" type of person.",
">\n\nPeople \"value themselves\" in relation to whatever values they hold, and, in a pluralistic society, people subscribe to different, and even contradictory, values: both a pacifist and a soldier are \"valuing themselves,\" even if one would find the other immoral, because they are doing the right thing (or at least not something objectionable) relative to their own values. \nLikewise, the people who do have frequent casual sex and the other who only have it within the context of a relationship can both be \"valuing themselves,\" insofar that they likely have different values they are abiding by.",
">\n\n\nit's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure\n\nLet's say Bob has a distance relationship with Dee. For practical reasons, they decide to be polyamorous, as they and their long distance partner don't have the means to travel often, and they want physical intimacy more often than they can meet up.\nIf Bob meets someone local, they've got a baseline of what good treatment is from Bob's relationship with Dee. So, they are more likely to have the confidence and self-respect, if faced from abuse or disrespect from a local prospective partner, to walk away.\nSomeone who is monogamous could be easier to be convinced that they have no other options and have to settle for an abusive partner who \"cares\" about them.\nI know several poly people, and I don't think they're more superficial than other people I know.",
">\n\nI am polyamorous. I find this extremely offensive.\nI guess that means I value at least a part of myself."
] |
>
Some weeks ago I was discussing with a friend about how women that dress "provocatively" are seen as less worthy of respect, inviting and more prone to be raped.
I'm gonna stop you right there.
Source?
Because that's nothing but misogynistic bullshit. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal.",
">\n\nOkay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's.",
">\n\nBecause unwanted pregnancies only happened to women. \nYou gotta remember we're talking about a time when starvation and plague (from things that we can easily cure today) was an everyday thing. Getting pregnant from some random dude was very bad. You might die in childbirth. If you don't you're unlikely to have the means to take care of the kid.",
">\n\nThere were ways to have abortions and they were used. Don't forget during the time the bible was made an abortion could be ordered on the husband's say so.",
">\n\n\nA person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them.\n\nSure, and this is only an issue if you believe that this intimate part is somehow \"sacred\" and/or \"gets damaged\" by continuous use.\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nAnd people do superficial things for pleasure - why it is inherently bad? If I f.ex. go to a board game pub and play a round of a game with a complete rando and then go away - I did the same, I never valued that personal relationship, it was superficial and I did it for pleasure - cause I wanted to play a game. Would that mean that someone who is frequenting a board game pub does not value themselves?\nI think that shows that only reason for this whole \"don't value themselves\" comes strictly from seeing sex as some kind of sacred union between two chosen people.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\n\nYou are slightly overexaggerating to feel better about an argument. Promiscuous people don't let \"everyone\" do \"whatever\" to their body - they let selected people do exactly what they want to their body.\n\nThey are letting themselves be used.\n\nAnd \"use\" other people, that is how this works - that is how every single human-human relation works.",
">\n\nPeople that go out and play casual board games with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected.\nA person that plays board games with many people lends their time and company to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them. Also, casual game playing behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think casual board game players have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their time and company. They are letting themselves be used.",
">\n\nAnd it comes further, this makes people believe they can take advantage of others with similar behaviors. Such as lurking in board game pubs and preying on those who were led into thinking that lifestyle is cool, buying them few drinks and then, my God, playing \"Monopoly\" with them.",
">\n\nCasual sex doesn't have to be as hedonistic as you're describing it to be. For some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\nBut casual sex can also be done safely and healthily. Viewing sex as a sacred thing doesn't mean it can only be experienced that way in a fulfilling monogamous relationship (though that is a great place for it). One can also have a \"sacred\" sexual experience casually, as it's just another way to explore their sexuality, which is an important part of what it means to be human. \nSometimes a deep romantic relationship just isn't in the cards for someone because of the place they're at in life or whatever reason. But they still, if they want to in the meantime, ought to have some way to have sexual experiences and fulfill that part of them. Or maybe they're not looking for a romantic relationship in general. \nAnd it's not simply \"letting everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\" Having the autonomy to choose to engage in casual sex and give someone access to them in a sexual way I believe can be more empowering than maybe you realize. \nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.",
">\n\n∆\n\nFor some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\n\nI was probably focusing too much on that part that I forgot that not everyone does it with the same purpose or that there's something bad with them.\n\nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.\n\nAnd that's what I thought before my friend changed my mind (that resulted in this post). Everyone can do whatever they want with their lives as long as it doesn't impact someone else negatively.",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Mundane-Magazine-229 (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n\nI say \"people\" because this goes for men as well, I think they disrespect themselves, but since society rewards men for sleeping with many women and punishes women for sleeping with many men, they don't make other men look bad like women do.\n\nWhy should the fact that society slut-shames women make promiscuity more acceptable for men?\nI suspect it's more that you say \"people\" rather than \"women\" because if you explicitly target women with this criticism it's more obviously misogynist. This is further evidenced by phrases like \"letting themselves be used,\" which typically is applied only to women by people who believe men are the only ones with sexual agency.",
">\n\nI'll go in more depth, but first which joyless humanity despising religious tradition are you part of?",
">\n\nI was raised in a christian household, thankfully not too extreme. This post came from the idea my friend gave me while discussing that convinced me because I couldn't find a better answer (that's why I made this post). She's christian as well, and more extreme. We usually disagree about our views and it's very rare of me to change my mind, but the argument trapped me.\nIn fact I'm non-religious and the \"people can do whatever they want if they like it and it's fine\" type of person.",
">\n\nPeople \"value themselves\" in relation to whatever values they hold, and, in a pluralistic society, people subscribe to different, and even contradictory, values: both a pacifist and a soldier are \"valuing themselves,\" even if one would find the other immoral, because they are doing the right thing (or at least not something objectionable) relative to their own values. \nLikewise, the people who do have frequent casual sex and the other who only have it within the context of a relationship can both be \"valuing themselves,\" insofar that they likely have different values they are abiding by.",
">\n\n\nit's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure\n\nLet's say Bob has a distance relationship with Dee. For practical reasons, they decide to be polyamorous, as they and their long distance partner don't have the means to travel often, and they want physical intimacy more often than they can meet up.\nIf Bob meets someone local, they've got a baseline of what good treatment is from Bob's relationship with Dee. So, they are more likely to have the confidence and self-respect, if faced from abuse or disrespect from a local prospective partner, to walk away.\nSomeone who is monogamous could be easier to be convinced that they have no other options and have to settle for an abusive partner who \"cares\" about them.\nI know several poly people, and I don't think they're more superficial than other people I know.",
">\n\nI am polyamorous. I find this extremely offensive.\nI guess that means I value at least a part of myself.",
">\n\nPeople don't have to ask you for permission for their sex lives. \nThey get to make choices that you won't agree with. And they get to ignore your ideas when it come to what they want to do with their life.\nif a person wants to wear revealing clothes that's something they can do and it doesn't have any bearing on who they are as a person. If they want to have sex with people that doesn't have any bearing on who they are as a person."
] |
>
Let's go point by point:
promiscuous people are less respected By whom? If someone is being unfaithful to their partner, that's another story, but someone with no agreements to be monogamous can do whatever they want.
promiscuous people make themselves be less disrespected Nope. Judgmental people are choosing to disrespect people for having consensual sex that they disapprove of.
women are making themselves and other women be disrespected by dressing or acting 'slutty' If you lose your respect for me just because my shorts are a bit shorter or I'm wearing a crop top, that is on you. I try to judge people based on their kindness, honesty, and accomplishments, not on what they're wearing or if they flirt with strangers.
a person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone First, no, they're not having sex with just anyone. They are choosing who they want to have sex with. Second, the idea of "lending one's body" doesn't make a lot of sense. When I have sex with my partner, it's both of us agreeing to do an activity that we both enjoy and find meaningful. Her body is still hers and my body is still mine, we are just agreeing to touch each other's bodies and be touched in intimate ways that we both really enjoy.
promiscuous behavior doesn't make sense because it doesn't value meaningful relationships and is mere pleasure Not all actions that a person takes have to be based on meaningful relationships. Someone can be promiscuous and have strong, healthy relationships with their friends and family. Just because they don't want to be monogamous at the moment doesn't mean that they are shallow or superficial. Secondly, I do a lot of things with other people that are strictly for the purposes of pleasure as opposed to developing meaningful relationships. I play online board games with strangers just to enjoy myself and I never pursue a relationship beyond occasionally texting "gg" at the end. It's fine because that's not the only way I interact with other people.
promiscuous people let people do whatever they want with their body I disagree with this point. Agreeing to have sex with someone isn't agreeing to let them do whatever they want to their body, but agreeing to have certain types of intimate contact. For example, if Jane and Thomas meet up at a bar and decide to hook up, Jane might agree to have Thomas suck her nipples but not finger her anus and Thomas might be ok with receiving a blow job but not with being spanked. It's between the two of them what they want to do together in order to both have a safe and enjoyable time. If Jane wanted to peg Thomas, who didn't want that, and she did that anyway, that would be sexual assault, not promiscuity. If Thomas forced Jane to give him a blowjob, again, sexual assault. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal.",
">\n\nOkay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's.",
">\n\nBecause unwanted pregnancies only happened to women. \nYou gotta remember we're talking about a time when starvation and plague (from things that we can easily cure today) was an everyday thing. Getting pregnant from some random dude was very bad. You might die in childbirth. If you don't you're unlikely to have the means to take care of the kid.",
">\n\nThere were ways to have abortions and they were used. Don't forget during the time the bible was made an abortion could be ordered on the husband's say so.",
">\n\n\nA person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them.\n\nSure, and this is only an issue if you believe that this intimate part is somehow \"sacred\" and/or \"gets damaged\" by continuous use.\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nAnd people do superficial things for pleasure - why it is inherently bad? If I f.ex. go to a board game pub and play a round of a game with a complete rando and then go away - I did the same, I never valued that personal relationship, it was superficial and I did it for pleasure - cause I wanted to play a game. Would that mean that someone who is frequenting a board game pub does not value themselves?\nI think that shows that only reason for this whole \"don't value themselves\" comes strictly from seeing sex as some kind of sacred union between two chosen people.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\n\nYou are slightly overexaggerating to feel better about an argument. Promiscuous people don't let \"everyone\" do \"whatever\" to their body - they let selected people do exactly what they want to their body.\n\nThey are letting themselves be used.\n\nAnd \"use\" other people, that is how this works - that is how every single human-human relation works.",
">\n\nPeople that go out and play casual board games with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected.\nA person that plays board games with many people lends their time and company to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them. Also, casual game playing behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think casual board game players have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their time and company. They are letting themselves be used.",
">\n\nAnd it comes further, this makes people believe they can take advantage of others with similar behaviors. Such as lurking in board game pubs and preying on those who were led into thinking that lifestyle is cool, buying them few drinks and then, my God, playing \"Monopoly\" with them.",
">\n\nCasual sex doesn't have to be as hedonistic as you're describing it to be. For some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\nBut casual sex can also be done safely and healthily. Viewing sex as a sacred thing doesn't mean it can only be experienced that way in a fulfilling monogamous relationship (though that is a great place for it). One can also have a \"sacred\" sexual experience casually, as it's just another way to explore their sexuality, which is an important part of what it means to be human. \nSometimes a deep romantic relationship just isn't in the cards for someone because of the place they're at in life or whatever reason. But they still, if they want to in the meantime, ought to have some way to have sexual experiences and fulfill that part of them. Or maybe they're not looking for a romantic relationship in general. \nAnd it's not simply \"letting everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\" Having the autonomy to choose to engage in casual sex and give someone access to them in a sexual way I believe can be more empowering than maybe you realize. \nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.",
">\n\n∆\n\nFor some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\n\nI was probably focusing too much on that part that I forgot that not everyone does it with the same purpose or that there's something bad with them.\n\nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.\n\nAnd that's what I thought before my friend changed my mind (that resulted in this post). Everyone can do whatever they want with their lives as long as it doesn't impact someone else negatively.",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Mundane-Magazine-229 (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n\nI say \"people\" because this goes for men as well, I think they disrespect themselves, but since society rewards men for sleeping with many women and punishes women for sleeping with many men, they don't make other men look bad like women do.\n\nWhy should the fact that society slut-shames women make promiscuity more acceptable for men?\nI suspect it's more that you say \"people\" rather than \"women\" because if you explicitly target women with this criticism it's more obviously misogynist. This is further evidenced by phrases like \"letting themselves be used,\" which typically is applied only to women by people who believe men are the only ones with sexual agency.",
">\n\nI'll go in more depth, but first which joyless humanity despising religious tradition are you part of?",
">\n\nI was raised in a christian household, thankfully not too extreme. This post came from the idea my friend gave me while discussing that convinced me because I couldn't find a better answer (that's why I made this post). She's christian as well, and more extreme. We usually disagree about our views and it's very rare of me to change my mind, but the argument trapped me.\nIn fact I'm non-religious and the \"people can do whatever they want if they like it and it's fine\" type of person.",
">\n\nPeople \"value themselves\" in relation to whatever values they hold, and, in a pluralistic society, people subscribe to different, and even contradictory, values: both a pacifist and a soldier are \"valuing themselves,\" even if one would find the other immoral, because they are doing the right thing (or at least not something objectionable) relative to their own values. \nLikewise, the people who do have frequent casual sex and the other who only have it within the context of a relationship can both be \"valuing themselves,\" insofar that they likely have different values they are abiding by.",
">\n\n\nit's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure\n\nLet's say Bob has a distance relationship with Dee. For practical reasons, they decide to be polyamorous, as they and their long distance partner don't have the means to travel often, and they want physical intimacy more often than they can meet up.\nIf Bob meets someone local, they've got a baseline of what good treatment is from Bob's relationship with Dee. So, they are more likely to have the confidence and self-respect, if faced from abuse or disrespect from a local prospective partner, to walk away.\nSomeone who is monogamous could be easier to be convinced that they have no other options and have to settle for an abusive partner who \"cares\" about them.\nI know several poly people, and I don't think they're more superficial than other people I know.",
">\n\nI am polyamorous. I find this extremely offensive.\nI guess that means I value at least a part of myself.",
">\n\nPeople don't have to ask you for permission for their sex lives. \nThey get to make choices that you won't agree with. And they get to ignore your ideas when it come to what they want to do with their life.\nif a person wants to wear revealing clothes that's something they can do and it doesn't have any bearing on who they are as a person. If they want to have sex with people that doesn't have any bearing on who they are as a person.",
">\n\n\nSome weeks ago I was discussing with a friend about how women that dress \"provocatively\" are seen as less worthy of respect, inviting and more prone to be raped.\n\nI'm gonna stop you right there. \nSource? \nBecause that's nothing but misogynistic bullshit."
] |
>
Also, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure
Being promiscuous and valuing personal relationships are not mutually exclusive at all. It doesn't take monogamy to value personal relationships. As someone in a long term open relationship, the fact that my partner and I both fuck other guys says very little about the value of our relationship.
I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.
Speaking as a slutty person I can tell you that being promiscuous doesn't mean people let everyone do whatever they want with their body (not that there's anything wrong with that). And consenting to sex with other consenting adults I guess is "letting yourself be used," but it's not a bad thing. You're framing it as though people get nothing out of it. I have some fun, you have some fun, everybody wins and we all go on with life. There's nothing inherently bad about this. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal.",
">\n\nOkay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's.",
">\n\nBecause unwanted pregnancies only happened to women. \nYou gotta remember we're talking about a time when starvation and plague (from things that we can easily cure today) was an everyday thing. Getting pregnant from some random dude was very bad. You might die in childbirth. If you don't you're unlikely to have the means to take care of the kid.",
">\n\nThere were ways to have abortions and they were used. Don't forget during the time the bible was made an abortion could be ordered on the husband's say so.",
">\n\n\nA person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them.\n\nSure, and this is only an issue if you believe that this intimate part is somehow \"sacred\" and/or \"gets damaged\" by continuous use.\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nAnd people do superficial things for pleasure - why it is inherently bad? If I f.ex. go to a board game pub and play a round of a game with a complete rando and then go away - I did the same, I never valued that personal relationship, it was superficial and I did it for pleasure - cause I wanted to play a game. Would that mean that someone who is frequenting a board game pub does not value themselves?\nI think that shows that only reason for this whole \"don't value themselves\" comes strictly from seeing sex as some kind of sacred union between two chosen people.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\n\nYou are slightly overexaggerating to feel better about an argument. Promiscuous people don't let \"everyone\" do \"whatever\" to their body - they let selected people do exactly what they want to their body.\n\nThey are letting themselves be used.\n\nAnd \"use\" other people, that is how this works - that is how every single human-human relation works.",
">\n\nPeople that go out and play casual board games with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected.\nA person that plays board games with many people lends their time and company to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them. Also, casual game playing behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think casual board game players have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their time and company. They are letting themselves be used.",
">\n\nAnd it comes further, this makes people believe they can take advantage of others with similar behaviors. Such as lurking in board game pubs and preying on those who were led into thinking that lifestyle is cool, buying them few drinks and then, my God, playing \"Monopoly\" with them.",
">\n\nCasual sex doesn't have to be as hedonistic as you're describing it to be. For some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\nBut casual sex can also be done safely and healthily. Viewing sex as a sacred thing doesn't mean it can only be experienced that way in a fulfilling monogamous relationship (though that is a great place for it). One can also have a \"sacred\" sexual experience casually, as it's just another way to explore their sexuality, which is an important part of what it means to be human. \nSometimes a deep romantic relationship just isn't in the cards for someone because of the place they're at in life or whatever reason. But they still, if they want to in the meantime, ought to have some way to have sexual experiences and fulfill that part of them. Or maybe they're not looking for a romantic relationship in general. \nAnd it's not simply \"letting everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\" Having the autonomy to choose to engage in casual sex and give someone access to them in a sexual way I believe can be more empowering than maybe you realize. \nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.",
">\n\n∆\n\nFor some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\n\nI was probably focusing too much on that part that I forgot that not everyone does it with the same purpose or that there's something bad with them.\n\nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.\n\nAnd that's what I thought before my friend changed my mind (that resulted in this post). Everyone can do whatever they want with their lives as long as it doesn't impact someone else negatively.",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Mundane-Magazine-229 (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n\nI say \"people\" because this goes for men as well, I think they disrespect themselves, but since society rewards men for sleeping with many women and punishes women for sleeping with many men, they don't make other men look bad like women do.\n\nWhy should the fact that society slut-shames women make promiscuity more acceptable for men?\nI suspect it's more that you say \"people\" rather than \"women\" because if you explicitly target women with this criticism it's more obviously misogynist. This is further evidenced by phrases like \"letting themselves be used,\" which typically is applied only to women by people who believe men are the only ones with sexual agency.",
">\n\nI'll go in more depth, but first which joyless humanity despising religious tradition are you part of?",
">\n\nI was raised in a christian household, thankfully not too extreme. This post came from the idea my friend gave me while discussing that convinced me because I couldn't find a better answer (that's why I made this post). She's christian as well, and more extreme. We usually disagree about our views and it's very rare of me to change my mind, but the argument trapped me.\nIn fact I'm non-religious and the \"people can do whatever they want if they like it and it's fine\" type of person.",
">\n\nPeople \"value themselves\" in relation to whatever values they hold, and, in a pluralistic society, people subscribe to different, and even contradictory, values: both a pacifist and a soldier are \"valuing themselves,\" even if one would find the other immoral, because they are doing the right thing (or at least not something objectionable) relative to their own values. \nLikewise, the people who do have frequent casual sex and the other who only have it within the context of a relationship can both be \"valuing themselves,\" insofar that they likely have different values they are abiding by.",
">\n\n\nit's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure\n\nLet's say Bob has a distance relationship with Dee. For practical reasons, they decide to be polyamorous, as they and their long distance partner don't have the means to travel often, and they want physical intimacy more often than they can meet up.\nIf Bob meets someone local, they've got a baseline of what good treatment is from Bob's relationship with Dee. So, they are more likely to have the confidence and self-respect, if faced from abuse or disrespect from a local prospective partner, to walk away.\nSomeone who is monogamous could be easier to be convinced that they have no other options and have to settle for an abusive partner who \"cares\" about them.\nI know several poly people, and I don't think they're more superficial than other people I know.",
">\n\nI am polyamorous. I find this extremely offensive.\nI guess that means I value at least a part of myself.",
">\n\nPeople don't have to ask you for permission for their sex lives. \nThey get to make choices that you won't agree with. And they get to ignore your ideas when it come to what they want to do with their life.\nif a person wants to wear revealing clothes that's something they can do and it doesn't have any bearing on who they are as a person. If they want to have sex with people that doesn't have any bearing on who they are as a person.",
">\n\n\nSome weeks ago I was discussing with a friend about how women that dress \"provocatively\" are seen as less worthy of respect, inviting and more prone to be raped.\n\nI'm gonna stop you right there. \nSource? \nBecause that's nothing but misogynistic bullshit.",
">\n\nLet's go point by point: \n\npromiscuous people are less respected By whom? If someone is being unfaithful to their partner, that's another story, but someone with no agreements to be monogamous can do whatever they want. \npromiscuous people make themselves be less disrespected Nope. Judgmental people are choosing to disrespect people for having consensual sex that they disapprove of.\nwomen are making themselves and other women be disrespected by dressing or acting 'slutty' If you lose your respect for me just because my shorts are a bit shorter or I'm wearing a crop top, that is on you. I try to judge people based on their kindness, honesty, and accomplishments, not on what they're wearing or if they flirt with strangers.\na person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone First, no, they're not having sex with just anyone. They are choosing who they want to have sex with. Second, the idea of \"lending one's body\" doesn't make a lot of sense. When I have sex with my partner, it's both of us agreeing to do an activity that we both enjoy and find meaningful. Her body is still hers and my body is still mine, we are just agreeing to touch each other's bodies and be touched in intimate ways that we both really enjoy. \n\npromiscuous behavior doesn't make sense because it doesn't value meaningful relationships and is mere pleasure Not all actions that a person takes have to be based on meaningful relationships. Someone can be promiscuous and have strong, healthy relationships with their friends and family. Just because they don't want to be monogamous at the moment doesn't mean that they are shallow or superficial. Secondly, I do a lot of things with other people that are strictly for the purposes of pleasure as opposed to developing meaningful relationships. I play online board games with strangers just to enjoy myself and I never pursue a relationship beyond occasionally texting \"gg\" at the end. It's fine because that's not the only way I interact with other people. \n\n\npromiscuous people let people do whatever they want with their body I disagree with this point. Agreeing to have sex with someone isn't agreeing to let them do whatever they want to their body, but agreeing to have certain types of intimate contact. For example, if Jane and Thomas meet up at a bar and decide to hook up, Jane might agree to have Thomas suck her nipples but not finger her anus and Thomas might be ok with receiving a blow job but not with being spanked. It's between the two of them what they want to do together in order to both have a safe and enjoyable time. If Jane wanted to peg Thomas, who didn't want that, and she did that anyway, that would be sexual assault, not promiscuity. If Thomas forced Jane to give him a blowjob, again, sexual assault."
] |
>
The first thing you have to accept is that the women of whom you speak are not dressing the way they do to seduce men; they are dressing that way to impress other women, and not in a lesbian way but rather in a one-up kind of way. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal.",
">\n\nOkay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's.",
">\n\nBecause unwanted pregnancies only happened to women. \nYou gotta remember we're talking about a time when starvation and plague (from things that we can easily cure today) was an everyday thing. Getting pregnant from some random dude was very bad. You might die in childbirth. If you don't you're unlikely to have the means to take care of the kid.",
">\n\nThere were ways to have abortions and they were used. Don't forget during the time the bible was made an abortion could be ordered on the husband's say so.",
">\n\n\nA person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them.\n\nSure, and this is only an issue if you believe that this intimate part is somehow \"sacred\" and/or \"gets damaged\" by continuous use.\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nAnd people do superficial things for pleasure - why it is inherently bad? If I f.ex. go to a board game pub and play a round of a game with a complete rando and then go away - I did the same, I never valued that personal relationship, it was superficial and I did it for pleasure - cause I wanted to play a game. Would that mean that someone who is frequenting a board game pub does not value themselves?\nI think that shows that only reason for this whole \"don't value themselves\" comes strictly from seeing sex as some kind of sacred union between two chosen people.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\n\nYou are slightly overexaggerating to feel better about an argument. Promiscuous people don't let \"everyone\" do \"whatever\" to their body - they let selected people do exactly what they want to their body.\n\nThey are letting themselves be used.\n\nAnd \"use\" other people, that is how this works - that is how every single human-human relation works.",
">\n\nPeople that go out and play casual board games with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected.\nA person that plays board games with many people lends their time and company to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them. Also, casual game playing behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think casual board game players have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their time and company. They are letting themselves be used.",
">\n\nAnd it comes further, this makes people believe they can take advantage of others with similar behaviors. Such as lurking in board game pubs and preying on those who were led into thinking that lifestyle is cool, buying them few drinks and then, my God, playing \"Monopoly\" with them.",
">\n\nCasual sex doesn't have to be as hedonistic as you're describing it to be. For some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\nBut casual sex can also be done safely and healthily. Viewing sex as a sacred thing doesn't mean it can only be experienced that way in a fulfilling monogamous relationship (though that is a great place for it). One can also have a \"sacred\" sexual experience casually, as it's just another way to explore their sexuality, which is an important part of what it means to be human. \nSometimes a deep romantic relationship just isn't in the cards for someone because of the place they're at in life or whatever reason. But they still, if they want to in the meantime, ought to have some way to have sexual experiences and fulfill that part of them. Or maybe they're not looking for a romantic relationship in general. \nAnd it's not simply \"letting everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\" Having the autonomy to choose to engage in casual sex and give someone access to them in a sexual way I believe can be more empowering than maybe you realize. \nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.",
">\n\n∆\n\nFor some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\n\nI was probably focusing too much on that part that I forgot that not everyone does it with the same purpose or that there's something bad with them.\n\nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.\n\nAnd that's what I thought before my friend changed my mind (that resulted in this post). Everyone can do whatever they want with their lives as long as it doesn't impact someone else negatively.",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Mundane-Magazine-229 (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n\nI say \"people\" because this goes for men as well, I think they disrespect themselves, but since society rewards men for sleeping with many women and punishes women for sleeping with many men, they don't make other men look bad like women do.\n\nWhy should the fact that society slut-shames women make promiscuity more acceptable for men?\nI suspect it's more that you say \"people\" rather than \"women\" because if you explicitly target women with this criticism it's more obviously misogynist. This is further evidenced by phrases like \"letting themselves be used,\" which typically is applied only to women by people who believe men are the only ones with sexual agency.",
">\n\nI'll go in more depth, but first which joyless humanity despising religious tradition are you part of?",
">\n\nI was raised in a christian household, thankfully not too extreme. This post came from the idea my friend gave me while discussing that convinced me because I couldn't find a better answer (that's why I made this post). She's christian as well, and more extreme. We usually disagree about our views and it's very rare of me to change my mind, but the argument trapped me.\nIn fact I'm non-religious and the \"people can do whatever they want if they like it and it's fine\" type of person.",
">\n\nPeople \"value themselves\" in relation to whatever values they hold, and, in a pluralistic society, people subscribe to different, and even contradictory, values: both a pacifist and a soldier are \"valuing themselves,\" even if one would find the other immoral, because they are doing the right thing (or at least not something objectionable) relative to their own values. \nLikewise, the people who do have frequent casual sex and the other who only have it within the context of a relationship can both be \"valuing themselves,\" insofar that they likely have different values they are abiding by.",
">\n\n\nit's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure\n\nLet's say Bob has a distance relationship with Dee. For practical reasons, they decide to be polyamorous, as they and their long distance partner don't have the means to travel often, and they want physical intimacy more often than they can meet up.\nIf Bob meets someone local, they've got a baseline of what good treatment is from Bob's relationship with Dee. So, they are more likely to have the confidence and self-respect, if faced from abuse or disrespect from a local prospective partner, to walk away.\nSomeone who is monogamous could be easier to be convinced that they have no other options and have to settle for an abusive partner who \"cares\" about them.\nI know several poly people, and I don't think they're more superficial than other people I know.",
">\n\nI am polyamorous. I find this extremely offensive.\nI guess that means I value at least a part of myself.",
">\n\nPeople don't have to ask you for permission for their sex lives. \nThey get to make choices that you won't agree with. And they get to ignore your ideas when it come to what they want to do with their life.\nif a person wants to wear revealing clothes that's something they can do and it doesn't have any bearing on who they are as a person. If they want to have sex with people that doesn't have any bearing on who they are as a person.",
">\n\n\nSome weeks ago I was discussing with a friend about how women that dress \"provocatively\" are seen as less worthy of respect, inviting and more prone to be raped.\n\nI'm gonna stop you right there. \nSource? \nBecause that's nothing but misogynistic bullshit.",
">\n\nLet's go point by point: \n\npromiscuous people are less respected By whom? If someone is being unfaithful to their partner, that's another story, but someone with no agreements to be monogamous can do whatever they want. \npromiscuous people make themselves be less disrespected Nope. Judgmental people are choosing to disrespect people for having consensual sex that they disapprove of.\nwomen are making themselves and other women be disrespected by dressing or acting 'slutty' If you lose your respect for me just because my shorts are a bit shorter or I'm wearing a crop top, that is on you. I try to judge people based on their kindness, honesty, and accomplishments, not on what they're wearing or if they flirt with strangers.\na person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone First, no, they're not having sex with just anyone. They are choosing who they want to have sex with. Second, the idea of \"lending one's body\" doesn't make a lot of sense. When I have sex with my partner, it's both of us agreeing to do an activity that we both enjoy and find meaningful. Her body is still hers and my body is still mine, we are just agreeing to touch each other's bodies and be touched in intimate ways that we both really enjoy. \n\npromiscuous behavior doesn't make sense because it doesn't value meaningful relationships and is mere pleasure Not all actions that a person takes have to be based on meaningful relationships. Someone can be promiscuous and have strong, healthy relationships with their friends and family. Just because they don't want to be monogamous at the moment doesn't mean that they are shallow or superficial. Secondly, I do a lot of things with other people that are strictly for the purposes of pleasure as opposed to developing meaningful relationships. I play online board games with strangers just to enjoy myself and I never pursue a relationship beyond occasionally texting \"gg\" at the end. It's fine because that's not the only way I interact with other people. \n\n\npromiscuous people let people do whatever they want with their body I disagree with this point. Agreeing to have sex with someone isn't agreeing to let them do whatever they want to their body, but agreeing to have certain types of intimate contact. For example, if Jane and Thomas meet up at a bar and decide to hook up, Jane might agree to have Thomas suck her nipples but not finger her anus and Thomas might be ok with receiving a blow job but not with being spanked. It's between the two of them what they want to do together in order to both have a safe and enjoyable time. If Jane wanted to peg Thomas, who didn't want that, and she did that anyway, that would be sexual assault, not promiscuity. If Thomas forced Jane to give him a blowjob, again, sexual assault.",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure\n\nBeing promiscuous and valuing personal relationships are not mutually exclusive at all. It doesn't take monogamy to value personal relationships. As someone in a long term open relationship, the fact that my partner and I both fuck other guys says very little about the value of our relationship.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nSpeaking as a slutty person I can tell you that being promiscuous doesn't mean people let everyone do whatever they want with their body (not that there's anything wrong with that). And consenting to sex with other consenting adults I guess is \"letting yourself be used,\" but it's not a bad thing. You're framing it as though people get nothing out of it. I have some fun, you have some fun, everybody wins and we all go on with life. There's nothing inherently bad about this."
] |
>
You never explained why casual sex devalues someone.
What’s the issue with someone who has sex with people because it feels good, it’s relaxing, and makes them feel good about themselves? Does everything have to be a higher level connection? So long as they use protection and it’s consensual, what’s the issue?
Is masturbation devaluing yourself too? Since it’s just physical pleasure?
What if you’re horny but don’t have anyone to be in a serious relationship with at the moment? You just shouldn’t have sex? Sex is a physical need in the same way as food, water, and shelter. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal.",
">\n\nOkay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's.",
">\n\nBecause unwanted pregnancies only happened to women. \nYou gotta remember we're talking about a time when starvation and plague (from things that we can easily cure today) was an everyday thing. Getting pregnant from some random dude was very bad. You might die in childbirth. If you don't you're unlikely to have the means to take care of the kid.",
">\n\nThere were ways to have abortions and they were used. Don't forget during the time the bible was made an abortion could be ordered on the husband's say so.",
">\n\n\nA person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them.\n\nSure, and this is only an issue if you believe that this intimate part is somehow \"sacred\" and/or \"gets damaged\" by continuous use.\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nAnd people do superficial things for pleasure - why it is inherently bad? If I f.ex. go to a board game pub and play a round of a game with a complete rando and then go away - I did the same, I never valued that personal relationship, it was superficial and I did it for pleasure - cause I wanted to play a game. Would that mean that someone who is frequenting a board game pub does not value themselves?\nI think that shows that only reason for this whole \"don't value themselves\" comes strictly from seeing sex as some kind of sacred union between two chosen people.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\n\nYou are slightly overexaggerating to feel better about an argument. Promiscuous people don't let \"everyone\" do \"whatever\" to their body - they let selected people do exactly what they want to their body.\n\nThey are letting themselves be used.\n\nAnd \"use\" other people, that is how this works - that is how every single human-human relation works.",
">\n\nPeople that go out and play casual board games with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected.\nA person that plays board games with many people lends their time and company to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them. Also, casual game playing behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think casual board game players have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their time and company. They are letting themselves be used.",
">\n\nAnd it comes further, this makes people believe they can take advantage of others with similar behaviors. Such as lurking in board game pubs and preying on those who were led into thinking that lifestyle is cool, buying them few drinks and then, my God, playing \"Monopoly\" with them.",
">\n\nCasual sex doesn't have to be as hedonistic as you're describing it to be. For some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\nBut casual sex can also be done safely and healthily. Viewing sex as a sacred thing doesn't mean it can only be experienced that way in a fulfilling monogamous relationship (though that is a great place for it). One can also have a \"sacred\" sexual experience casually, as it's just another way to explore their sexuality, which is an important part of what it means to be human. \nSometimes a deep romantic relationship just isn't in the cards for someone because of the place they're at in life or whatever reason. But they still, if they want to in the meantime, ought to have some way to have sexual experiences and fulfill that part of them. Or maybe they're not looking for a romantic relationship in general. \nAnd it's not simply \"letting everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\" Having the autonomy to choose to engage in casual sex and give someone access to them in a sexual way I believe can be more empowering than maybe you realize. \nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.",
">\n\n∆\n\nFor some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\n\nI was probably focusing too much on that part that I forgot that not everyone does it with the same purpose or that there's something bad with them.\n\nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.\n\nAnd that's what I thought before my friend changed my mind (that resulted in this post). Everyone can do whatever they want with their lives as long as it doesn't impact someone else negatively.",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Mundane-Magazine-229 (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n\nI say \"people\" because this goes for men as well, I think they disrespect themselves, but since society rewards men for sleeping with many women and punishes women for sleeping with many men, they don't make other men look bad like women do.\n\nWhy should the fact that society slut-shames women make promiscuity more acceptable for men?\nI suspect it's more that you say \"people\" rather than \"women\" because if you explicitly target women with this criticism it's more obviously misogynist. This is further evidenced by phrases like \"letting themselves be used,\" which typically is applied only to women by people who believe men are the only ones with sexual agency.",
">\n\nI'll go in more depth, but first which joyless humanity despising religious tradition are you part of?",
">\n\nI was raised in a christian household, thankfully not too extreme. This post came from the idea my friend gave me while discussing that convinced me because I couldn't find a better answer (that's why I made this post). She's christian as well, and more extreme. We usually disagree about our views and it's very rare of me to change my mind, but the argument trapped me.\nIn fact I'm non-religious and the \"people can do whatever they want if they like it and it's fine\" type of person.",
">\n\nPeople \"value themselves\" in relation to whatever values they hold, and, in a pluralistic society, people subscribe to different, and even contradictory, values: both a pacifist and a soldier are \"valuing themselves,\" even if one would find the other immoral, because they are doing the right thing (or at least not something objectionable) relative to their own values. \nLikewise, the people who do have frequent casual sex and the other who only have it within the context of a relationship can both be \"valuing themselves,\" insofar that they likely have different values they are abiding by.",
">\n\n\nit's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure\n\nLet's say Bob has a distance relationship with Dee. For practical reasons, they decide to be polyamorous, as they and their long distance partner don't have the means to travel often, and they want physical intimacy more often than they can meet up.\nIf Bob meets someone local, they've got a baseline of what good treatment is from Bob's relationship with Dee. So, they are more likely to have the confidence and self-respect, if faced from abuse or disrespect from a local prospective partner, to walk away.\nSomeone who is monogamous could be easier to be convinced that they have no other options and have to settle for an abusive partner who \"cares\" about them.\nI know several poly people, and I don't think they're more superficial than other people I know.",
">\n\nI am polyamorous. I find this extremely offensive.\nI guess that means I value at least a part of myself.",
">\n\nPeople don't have to ask you for permission for their sex lives. \nThey get to make choices that you won't agree with. And they get to ignore your ideas when it come to what they want to do with their life.\nif a person wants to wear revealing clothes that's something they can do and it doesn't have any bearing on who they are as a person. If they want to have sex with people that doesn't have any bearing on who they are as a person.",
">\n\n\nSome weeks ago I was discussing with a friend about how women that dress \"provocatively\" are seen as less worthy of respect, inviting and more prone to be raped.\n\nI'm gonna stop you right there. \nSource? \nBecause that's nothing but misogynistic bullshit.",
">\n\nLet's go point by point: \n\npromiscuous people are less respected By whom? If someone is being unfaithful to their partner, that's another story, but someone with no agreements to be monogamous can do whatever they want. \npromiscuous people make themselves be less disrespected Nope. Judgmental people are choosing to disrespect people for having consensual sex that they disapprove of.\nwomen are making themselves and other women be disrespected by dressing or acting 'slutty' If you lose your respect for me just because my shorts are a bit shorter or I'm wearing a crop top, that is on you. I try to judge people based on their kindness, honesty, and accomplishments, not on what they're wearing or if they flirt with strangers.\na person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone First, no, they're not having sex with just anyone. They are choosing who they want to have sex with. Second, the idea of \"lending one's body\" doesn't make a lot of sense. When I have sex with my partner, it's both of us agreeing to do an activity that we both enjoy and find meaningful. Her body is still hers and my body is still mine, we are just agreeing to touch each other's bodies and be touched in intimate ways that we both really enjoy. \n\npromiscuous behavior doesn't make sense because it doesn't value meaningful relationships and is mere pleasure Not all actions that a person takes have to be based on meaningful relationships. Someone can be promiscuous and have strong, healthy relationships with their friends and family. Just because they don't want to be monogamous at the moment doesn't mean that they are shallow or superficial. Secondly, I do a lot of things with other people that are strictly for the purposes of pleasure as opposed to developing meaningful relationships. I play online board games with strangers just to enjoy myself and I never pursue a relationship beyond occasionally texting \"gg\" at the end. It's fine because that's not the only way I interact with other people. \n\n\npromiscuous people let people do whatever they want with their body I disagree with this point. Agreeing to have sex with someone isn't agreeing to let them do whatever they want to their body, but agreeing to have certain types of intimate contact. For example, if Jane and Thomas meet up at a bar and decide to hook up, Jane might agree to have Thomas suck her nipples but not finger her anus and Thomas might be ok with receiving a blow job but not with being spanked. It's between the two of them what they want to do together in order to both have a safe and enjoyable time. If Jane wanted to peg Thomas, who didn't want that, and she did that anyway, that would be sexual assault, not promiscuity. If Thomas forced Jane to give him a blowjob, again, sexual assault.",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure\n\nBeing promiscuous and valuing personal relationships are not mutually exclusive at all. It doesn't take monogamy to value personal relationships. As someone in a long term open relationship, the fact that my partner and I both fuck other guys says very little about the value of our relationship.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nSpeaking as a slutty person I can tell you that being promiscuous doesn't mean people let everyone do whatever they want with their body (not that there's anything wrong with that). And consenting to sex with other consenting adults I guess is \"letting yourself be used,\" but it's not a bad thing. You're framing it as though people get nothing out of it. I have some fun, you have some fun, everybody wins and we all go on with life. There's nothing inherently bad about this.",
">\n\nThe first thing you have to accept is that the women of whom you speak are not dressing the way they do to seduce men; they are dressing that way to impress other women, and not in a lesbian way but rather in a one-up kind of way."
] |
>
I don't know where you are from but here, sex is an act of pleasure many people participate in. To think that enjoying sex somehow makes you less valuable is hard for me to understand. I mean, we were all born wanting some you know?
The limit of one person to play with is inspired by religious institutions like the one famous for raping little boys or the one famous for not letting women drive work go to school or show ankles. Hardly role models we should follow.
Live your life! | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal.",
">\n\nOkay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's.",
">\n\nBecause unwanted pregnancies only happened to women. \nYou gotta remember we're talking about a time when starvation and plague (from things that we can easily cure today) was an everyday thing. Getting pregnant from some random dude was very bad. You might die in childbirth. If you don't you're unlikely to have the means to take care of the kid.",
">\n\nThere were ways to have abortions and they were used. Don't forget during the time the bible was made an abortion could be ordered on the husband's say so.",
">\n\n\nA person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them.\n\nSure, and this is only an issue if you believe that this intimate part is somehow \"sacred\" and/or \"gets damaged\" by continuous use.\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nAnd people do superficial things for pleasure - why it is inherently bad? If I f.ex. go to a board game pub and play a round of a game with a complete rando and then go away - I did the same, I never valued that personal relationship, it was superficial and I did it for pleasure - cause I wanted to play a game. Would that mean that someone who is frequenting a board game pub does not value themselves?\nI think that shows that only reason for this whole \"don't value themselves\" comes strictly from seeing sex as some kind of sacred union between two chosen people.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\n\nYou are slightly overexaggerating to feel better about an argument. Promiscuous people don't let \"everyone\" do \"whatever\" to their body - they let selected people do exactly what they want to their body.\n\nThey are letting themselves be used.\n\nAnd \"use\" other people, that is how this works - that is how every single human-human relation works.",
">\n\nPeople that go out and play casual board games with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected.\nA person that plays board games with many people lends their time and company to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them. Also, casual game playing behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think casual board game players have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their time and company. They are letting themselves be used.",
">\n\nAnd it comes further, this makes people believe they can take advantage of others with similar behaviors. Such as lurking in board game pubs and preying on those who were led into thinking that lifestyle is cool, buying them few drinks and then, my God, playing \"Monopoly\" with them.",
">\n\nCasual sex doesn't have to be as hedonistic as you're describing it to be. For some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\nBut casual sex can also be done safely and healthily. Viewing sex as a sacred thing doesn't mean it can only be experienced that way in a fulfilling monogamous relationship (though that is a great place for it). One can also have a \"sacred\" sexual experience casually, as it's just another way to explore their sexuality, which is an important part of what it means to be human. \nSometimes a deep romantic relationship just isn't in the cards for someone because of the place they're at in life or whatever reason. But they still, if they want to in the meantime, ought to have some way to have sexual experiences and fulfill that part of them. Or maybe they're not looking for a romantic relationship in general. \nAnd it's not simply \"letting everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\" Having the autonomy to choose to engage in casual sex and give someone access to them in a sexual way I believe can be more empowering than maybe you realize. \nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.",
">\n\n∆\n\nFor some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\n\nI was probably focusing too much on that part that I forgot that not everyone does it with the same purpose or that there's something bad with them.\n\nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.\n\nAnd that's what I thought before my friend changed my mind (that resulted in this post). Everyone can do whatever they want with their lives as long as it doesn't impact someone else negatively.",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Mundane-Magazine-229 (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n\nI say \"people\" because this goes for men as well, I think they disrespect themselves, but since society rewards men for sleeping with many women and punishes women for sleeping with many men, they don't make other men look bad like women do.\n\nWhy should the fact that society slut-shames women make promiscuity more acceptable for men?\nI suspect it's more that you say \"people\" rather than \"women\" because if you explicitly target women with this criticism it's more obviously misogynist. This is further evidenced by phrases like \"letting themselves be used,\" which typically is applied only to women by people who believe men are the only ones with sexual agency.",
">\n\nI'll go in more depth, but first which joyless humanity despising religious tradition are you part of?",
">\n\nI was raised in a christian household, thankfully not too extreme. This post came from the idea my friend gave me while discussing that convinced me because I couldn't find a better answer (that's why I made this post). She's christian as well, and more extreme. We usually disagree about our views and it's very rare of me to change my mind, but the argument trapped me.\nIn fact I'm non-religious and the \"people can do whatever they want if they like it and it's fine\" type of person.",
">\n\nPeople \"value themselves\" in relation to whatever values they hold, and, in a pluralistic society, people subscribe to different, and even contradictory, values: both a pacifist and a soldier are \"valuing themselves,\" even if one would find the other immoral, because they are doing the right thing (or at least not something objectionable) relative to their own values. \nLikewise, the people who do have frequent casual sex and the other who only have it within the context of a relationship can both be \"valuing themselves,\" insofar that they likely have different values they are abiding by.",
">\n\n\nit's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure\n\nLet's say Bob has a distance relationship with Dee. For practical reasons, they decide to be polyamorous, as they and their long distance partner don't have the means to travel often, and they want physical intimacy more often than they can meet up.\nIf Bob meets someone local, they've got a baseline of what good treatment is from Bob's relationship with Dee. So, they are more likely to have the confidence and self-respect, if faced from abuse or disrespect from a local prospective partner, to walk away.\nSomeone who is monogamous could be easier to be convinced that they have no other options and have to settle for an abusive partner who \"cares\" about them.\nI know several poly people, and I don't think they're more superficial than other people I know.",
">\n\nI am polyamorous. I find this extremely offensive.\nI guess that means I value at least a part of myself.",
">\n\nPeople don't have to ask you for permission for their sex lives. \nThey get to make choices that you won't agree with. And they get to ignore your ideas when it come to what they want to do with their life.\nif a person wants to wear revealing clothes that's something they can do and it doesn't have any bearing on who they are as a person. If they want to have sex with people that doesn't have any bearing on who they are as a person.",
">\n\n\nSome weeks ago I was discussing with a friend about how women that dress \"provocatively\" are seen as less worthy of respect, inviting and more prone to be raped.\n\nI'm gonna stop you right there. \nSource? \nBecause that's nothing but misogynistic bullshit.",
">\n\nLet's go point by point: \n\npromiscuous people are less respected By whom? If someone is being unfaithful to their partner, that's another story, but someone with no agreements to be monogamous can do whatever they want. \npromiscuous people make themselves be less disrespected Nope. Judgmental people are choosing to disrespect people for having consensual sex that they disapprove of.\nwomen are making themselves and other women be disrespected by dressing or acting 'slutty' If you lose your respect for me just because my shorts are a bit shorter or I'm wearing a crop top, that is on you. I try to judge people based on their kindness, honesty, and accomplishments, not on what they're wearing or if they flirt with strangers.\na person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone First, no, they're not having sex with just anyone. They are choosing who they want to have sex with. Second, the idea of \"lending one's body\" doesn't make a lot of sense. When I have sex with my partner, it's both of us agreeing to do an activity that we both enjoy and find meaningful. Her body is still hers and my body is still mine, we are just agreeing to touch each other's bodies and be touched in intimate ways that we both really enjoy. \n\npromiscuous behavior doesn't make sense because it doesn't value meaningful relationships and is mere pleasure Not all actions that a person takes have to be based on meaningful relationships. Someone can be promiscuous and have strong, healthy relationships with their friends and family. Just because they don't want to be monogamous at the moment doesn't mean that they are shallow or superficial. Secondly, I do a lot of things with other people that are strictly for the purposes of pleasure as opposed to developing meaningful relationships. I play online board games with strangers just to enjoy myself and I never pursue a relationship beyond occasionally texting \"gg\" at the end. It's fine because that's not the only way I interact with other people. \n\n\npromiscuous people let people do whatever they want with their body I disagree with this point. Agreeing to have sex with someone isn't agreeing to let them do whatever they want to their body, but agreeing to have certain types of intimate contact. For example, if Jane and Thomas meet up at a bar and decide to hook up, Jane might agree to have Thomas suck her nipples but not finger her anus and Thomas might be ok with receiving a blow job but not with being spanked. It's between the two of them what they want to do together in order to both have a safe and enjoyable time. If Jane wanted to peg Thomas, who didn't want that, and she did that anyway, that would be sexual assault, not promiscuity. If Thomas forced Jane to give him a blowjob, again, sexual assault.",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure\n\nBeing promiscuous and valuing personal relationships are not mutually exclusive at all. It doesn't take monogamy to value personal relationships. As someone in a long term open relationship, the fact that my partner and I both fuck other guys says very little about the value of our relationship.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nSpeaking as a slutty person I can tell you that being promiscuous doesn't mean people let everyone do whatever they want with their body (not that there's anything wrong with that). And consenting to sex with other consenting adults I guess is \"letting yourself be used,\" but it's not a bad thing. You're framing it as though people get nothing out of it. I have some fun, you have some fun, everybody wins and we all go on with life. There's nothing inherently bad about this.",
">\n\nThe first thing you have to accept is that the women of whom you speak are not dressing the way they do to seduce men; they are dressing that way to impress other women, and not in a lesbian way but rather in a one-up kind of way.",
">\n\nYou never explained why casual sex devalues someone. \nWhat’s the issue with someone who has sex with people because it feels good, it’s relaxing, and makes them feel good about themselves? Does everything have to be a higher level connection? So long as they use protection and it’s consensual, what’s the issue?\nIs masturbation devaluing yourself too? Since it’s just physical pleasure?\nWhat if you’re horny but don’t have anyone to be in a serious relationship with at the moment? You just shouldn’t have sex? Sex is a physical need in the same way as food, water, and shelter."
] |
>
I don't lend someone my body when I have sex with them, or let them do whatever they want to me. And there's nothing about me (or about my partner) that is diminished in the act of sex.
I'm sure there are promiscuous people who don't value themselves, but the are also chaste people who don't value themselves. Self respect isn't a matter of keeping everyone at a specific pre-defined distance, it's about setting and enforcing the boundaries that you want to have. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal.",
">\n\nOkay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's.",
">\n\nBecause unwanted pregnancies only happened to women. \nYou gotta remember we're talking about a time when starvation and plague (from things that we can easily cure today) was an everyday thing. Getting pregnant from some random dude was very bad. You might die in childbirth. If you don't you're unlikely to have the means to take care of the kid.",
">\n\nThere were ways to have abortions and they were used. Don't forget during the time the bible was made an abortion could be ordered on the husband's say so.",
">\n\n\nA person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them.\n\nSure, and this is only an issue if you believe that this intimate part is somehow \"sacred\" and/or \"gets damaged\" by continuous use.\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nAnd people do superficial things for pleasure - why it is inherently bad? If I f.ex. go to a board game pub and play a round of a game with a complete rando and then go away - I did the same, I never valued that personal relationship, it was superficial and I did it for pleasure - cause I wanted to play a game. Would that mean that someone who is frequenting a board game pub does not value themselves?\nI think that shows that only reason for this whole \"don't value themselves\" comes strictly from seeing sex as some kind of sacred union between two chosen people.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\n\nYou are slightly overexaggerating to feel better about an argument. Promiscuous people don't let \"everyone\" do \"whatever\" to their body - they let selected people do exactly what they want to their body.\n\nThey are letting themselves be used.\n\nAnd \"use\" other people, that is how this works - that is how every single human-human relation works.",
">\n\nPeople that go out and play casual board games with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected.\nA person that plays board games with many people lends their time and company to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them. Also, casual game playing behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think casual board game players have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their time and company. They are letting themselves be used.",
">\n\nAnd it comes further, this makes people believe they can take advantage of others with similar behaviors. Such as lurking in board game pubs and preying on those who were led into thinking that lifestyle is cool, buying them few drinks and then, my God, playing \"Monopoly\" with them.",
">\n\nCasual sex doesn't have to be as hedonistic as you're describing it to be. For some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\nBut casual sex can also be done safely and healthily. Viewing sex as a sacred thing doesn't mean it can only be experienced that way in a fulfilling monogamous relationship (though that is a great place for it). One can also have a \"sacred\" sexual experience casually, as it's just another way to explore their sexuality, which is an important part of what it means to be human. \nSometimes a deep romantic relationship just isn't in the cards for someone because of the place they're at in life or whatever reason. But they still, if they want to in the meantime, ought to have some way to have sexual experiences and fulfill that part of them. Or maybe they're not looking for a romantic relationship in general. \nAnd it's not simply \"letting everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\" Having the autonomy to choose to engage in casual sex and give someone access to them in a sexual way I believe can be more empowering than maybe you realize. \nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.",
">\n\n∆\n\nFor some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\n\nI was probably focusing too much on that part that I forgot that not everyone does it with the same purpose or that there's something bad with them.\n\nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.\n\nAnd that's what I thought before my friend changed my mind (that resulted in this post). Everyone can do whatever they want with their lives as long as it doesn't impact someone else negatively.",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Mundane-Magazine-229 (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n\nI say \"people\" because this goes for men as well, I think they disrespect themselves, but since society rewards men for sleeping with many women and punishes women for sleeping with many men, they don't make other men look bad like women do.\n\nWhy should the fact that society slut-shames women make promiscuity more acceptable for men?\nI suspect it's more that you say \"people\" rather than \"women\" because if you explicitly target women with this criticism it's more obviously misogynist. This is further evidenced by phrases like \"letting themselves be used,\" which typically is applied only to women by people who believe men are the only ones with sexual agency.",
">\n\nI'll go in more depth, but first which joyless humanity despising religious tradition are you part of?",
">\n\nI was raised in a christian household, thankfully not too extreme. This post came from the idea my friend gave me while discussing that convinced me because I couldn't find a better answer (that's why I made this post). She's christian as well, and more extreme. We usually disagree about our views and it's very rare of me to change my mind, but the argument trapped me.\nIn fact I'm non-religious and the \"people can do whatever they want if they like it and it's fine\" type of person.",
">\n\nPeople \"value themselves\" in relation to whatever values they hold, and, in a pluralistic society, people subscribe to different, and even contradictory, values: both a pacifist and a soldier are \"valuing themselves,\" even if one would find the other immoral, because they are doing the right thing (or at least not something objectionable) relative to their own values. \nLikewise, the people who do have frequent casual sex and the other who only have it within the context of a relationship can both be \"valuing themselves,\" insofar that they likely have different values they are abiding by.",
">\n\n\nit's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure\n\nLet's say Bob has a distance relationship with Dee. For practical reasons, they decide to be polyamorous, as they and their long distance partner don't have the means to travel often, and they want physical intimacy more often than they can meet up.\nIf Bob meets someone local, they've got a baseline of what good treatment is from Bob's relationship with Dee. So, they are more likely to have the confidence and self-respect, if faced from abuse or disrespect from a local prospective partner, to walk away.\nSomeone who is monogamous could be easier to be convinced that they have no other options and have to settle for an abusive partner who \"cares\" about them.\nI know several poly people, and I don't think they're more superficial than other people I know.",
">\n\nI am polyamorous. I find this extremely offensive.\nI guess that means I value at least a part of myself.",
">\n\nPeople don't have to ask you for permission for their sex lives. \nThey get to make choices that you won't agree with. And they get to ignore your ideas when it come to what they want to do with their life.\nif a person wants to wear revealing clothes that's something they can do and it doesn't have any bearing on who they are as a person. If they want to have sex with people that doesn't have any bearing on who they are as a person.",
">\n\n\nSome weeks ago I was discussing with a friend about how women that dress \"provocatively\" are seen as less worthy of respect, inviting and more prone to be raped.\n\nI'm gonna stop you right there. \nSource? \nBecause that's nothing but misogynistic bullshit.",
">\n\nLet's go point by point: \n\npromiscuous people are less respected By whom? If someone is being unfaithful to their partner, that's another story, but someone with no agreements to be monogamous can do whatever they want. \npromiscuous people make themselves be less disrespected Nope. Judgmental people are choosing to disrespect people for having consensual sex that they disapprove of.\nwomen are making themselves and other women be disrespected by dressing or acting 'slutty' If you lose your respect for me just because my shorts are a bit shorter or I'm wearing a crop top, that is on you. I try to judge people based on their kindness, honesty, and accomplishments, not on what they're wearing or if they flirt with strangers.\na person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone First, no, they're not having sex with just anyone. They are choosing who they want to have sex with. Second, the idea of \"lending one's body\" doesn't make a lot of sense. When I have sex with my partner, it's both of us agreeing to do an activity that we both enjoy and find meaningful. Her body is still hers and my body is still mine, we are just agreeing to touch each other's bodies and be touched in intimate ways that we both really enjoy. \n\npromiscuous behavior doesn't make sense because it doesn't value meaningful relationships and is mere pleasure Not all actions that a person takes have to be based on meaningful relationships. Someone can be promiscuous and have strong, healthy relationships with their friends and family. Just because they don't want to be monogamous at the moment doesn't mean that they are shallow or superficial. Secondly, I do a lot of things with other people that are strictly for the purposes of pleasure as opposed to developing meaningful relationships. I play online board games with strangers just to enjoy myself and I never pursue a relationship beyond occasionally texting \"gg\" at the end. It's fine because that's not the only way I interact with other people. \n\n\npromiscuous people let people do whatever they want with their body I disagree with this point. Agreeing to have sex with someone isn't agreeing to let them do whatever they want to their body, but agreeing to have certain types of intimate contact. For example, if Jane and Thomas meet up at a bar and decide to hook up, Jane might agree to have Thomas suck her nipples but not finger her anus and Thomas might be ok with receiving a blow job but not with being spanked. It's between the two of them what they want to do together in order to both have a safe and enjoyable time. If Jane wanted to peg Thomas, who didn't want that, and she did that anyway, that would be sexual assault, not promiscuity. If Thomas forced Jane to give him a blowjob, again, sexual assault.",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure\n\nBeing promiscuous and valuing personal relationships are not mutually exclusive at all. It doesn't take monogamy to value personal relationships. As someone in a long term open relationship, the fact that my partner and I both fuck other guys says very little about the value of our relationship.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nSpeaking as a slutty person I can tell you that being promiscuous doesn't mean people let everyone do whatever they want with their body (not that there's anything wrong with that). And consenting to sex with other consenting adults I guess is \"letting yourself be used,\" but it's not a bad thing. You're framing it as though people get nothing out of it. I have some fun, you have some fun, everybody wins and we all go on with life. There's nothing inherently bad about this.",
">\n\nThe first thing you have to accept is that the women of whom you speak are not dressing the way they do to seduce men; they are dressing that way to impress other women, and not in a lesbian way but rather in a one-up kind of way.",
">\n\nYou never explained why casual sex devalues someone. \nWhat’s the issue with someone who has sex with people because it feels good, it’s relaxing, and makes them feel good about themselves? Does everything have to be a higher level connection? So long as they use protection and it’s consensual, what’s the issue?\nIs masturbation devaluing yourself too? Since it’s just physical pleasure?\nWhat if you’re horny but don’t have anyone to be in a serious relationship with at the moment? You just shouldn’t have sex? Sex is a physical need in the same way as food, water, and shelter.",
">\n\nI don't know where you are from but here, sex is an act of pleasure many people participate in. To think that enjoying sex somehow makes you less valuable is hard for me to understand. I mean, we were all born wanting some you know? \nThe limit of one person to play with is inspired by religious institutions like the one famous for raping little boys or the one famous for not letting women drive work go to school or show ankles. Hardly role models we should follow. \nLive your life!"
] |
>
What doesn't make sense about promiscuous sex? Sex feels good. A lot of people are hot. You can think it's immoral but it's not exactly a paradox or a logic puzzle as to why people do it. | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal.",
">\n\nOkay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's.",
">\n\nBecause unwanted pregnancies only happened to women. \nYou gotta remember we're talking about a time when starvation and plague (from things that we can easily cure today) was an everyday thing. Getting pregnant from some random dude was very bad. You might die in childbirth. If you don't you're unlikely to have the means to take care of the kid.",
">\n\nThere were ways to have abortions and they were used. Don't forget during the time the bible was made an abortion could be ordered on the husband's say so.",
">\n\n\nA person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them.\n\nSure, and this is only an issue if you believe that this intimate part is somehow \"sacred\" and/or \"gets damaged\" by continuous use.\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nAnd people do superficial things for pleasure - why it is inherently bad? If I f.ex. go to a board game pub and play a round of a game with a complete rando and then go away - I did the same, I never valued that personal relationship, it was superficial and I did it for pleasure - cause I wanted to play a game. Would that mean that someone who is frequenting a board game pub does not value themselves?\nI think that shows that only reason for this whole \"don't value themselves\" comes strictly from seeing sex as some kind of sacred union between two chosen people.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\n\nYou are slightly overexaggerating to feel better about an argument. Promiscuous people don't let \"everyone\" do \"whatever\" to their body - they let selected people do exactly what they want to their body.\n\nThey are letting themselves be used.\n\nAnd \"use\" other people, that is how this works - that is how every single human-human relation works.",
">\n\nPeople that go out and play casual board games with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected.\nA person that plays board games with many people lends their time and company to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them. Also, casual game playing behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think casual board game players have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their time and company. They are letting themselves be used.",
">\n\nAnd it comes further, this makes people believe they can take advantage of others with similar behaviors. Such as lurking in board game pubs and preying on those who were led into thinking that lifestyle is cool, buying them few drinks and then, my God, playing \"Monopoly\" with them.",
">\n\nCasual sex doesn't have to be as hedonistic as you're describing it to be. For some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\nBut casual sex can also be done safely and healthily. Viewing sex as a sacred thing doesn't mean it can only be experienced that way in a fulfilling monogamous relationship (though that is a great place for it). One can also have a \"sacred\" sexual experience casually, as it's just another way to explore their sexuality, which is an important part of what it means to be human. \nSometimes a deep romantic relationship just isn't in the cards for someone because of the place they're at in life or whatever reason. But they still, if they want to in the meantime, ought to have some way to have sexual experiences and fulfill that part of them. Or maybe they're not looking for a romantic relationship in general. \nAnd it's not simply \"letting everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\" Having the autonomy to choose to engage in casual sex and give someone access to them in a sexual way I believe can be more empowering than maybe you realize. \nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.",
">\n\n∆\n\nFor some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\n\nI was probably focusing too much on that part that I forgot that not everyone does it with the same purpose or that there's something bad with them.\n\nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.\n\nAnd that's what I thought before my friend changed my mind (that resulted in this post). Everyone can do whatever they want with their lives as long as it doesn't impact someone else negatively.",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Mundane-Magazine-229 (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n\nI say \"people\" because this goes for men as well, I think they disrespect themselves, but since society rewards men for sleeping with many women and punishes women for sleeping with many men, they don't make other men look bad like women do.\n\nWhy should the fact that society slut-shames women make promiscuity more acceptable for men?\nI suspect it's more that you say \"people\" rather than \"women\" because if you explicitly target women with this criticism it's more obviously misogynist. This is further evidenced by phrases like \"letting themselves be used,\" which typically is applied only to women by people who believe men are the only ones with sexual agency.",
">\n\nI'll go in more depth, but first which joyless humanity despising religious tradition are you part of?",
">\n\nI was raised in a christian household, thankfully not too extreme. This post came from the idea my friend gave me while discussing that convinced me because I couldn't find a better answer (that's why I made this post). She's christian as well, and more extreme. We usually disagree about our views and it's very rare of me to change my mind, but the argument trapped me.\nIn fact I'm non-religious and the \"people can do whatever they want if they like it and it's fine\" type of person.",
">\n\nPeople \"value themselves\" in relation to whatever values they hold, and, in a pluralistic society, people subscribe to different, and even contradictory, values: both a pacifist and a soldier are \"valuing themselves,\" even if one would find the other immoral, because they are doing the right thing (or at least not something objectionable) relative to their own values. \nLikewise, the people who do have frequent casual sex and the other who only have it within the context of a relationship can both be \"valuing themselves,\" insofar that they likely have different values they are abiding by.",
">\n\n\nit's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure\n\nLet's say Bob has a distance relationship with Dee. For practical reasons, they decide to be polyamorous, as they and their long distance partner don't have the means to travel often, and they want physical intimacy more often than they can meet up.\nIf Bob meets someone local, they've got a baseline of what good treatment is from Bob's relationship with Dee. So, they are more likely to have the confidence and self-respect, if faced from abuse or disrespect from a local prospective partner, to walk away.\nSomeone who is monogamous could be easier to be convinced that they have no other options and have to settle for an abusive partner who \"cares\" about them.\nI know several poly people, and I don't think they're more superficial than other people I know.",
">\n\nI am polyamorous. I find this extremely offensive.\nI guess that means I value at least a part of myself.",
">\n\nPeople don't have to ask you for permission for their sex lives. \nThey get to make choices that you won't agree with. And they get to ignore your ideas when it come to what they want to do with their life.\nif a person wants to wear revealing clothes that's something they can do and it doesn't have any bearing on who they are as a person. If they want to have sex with people that doesn't have any bearing on who they are as a person.",
">\n\n\nSome weeks ago I was discussing with a friend about how women that dress \"provocatively\" are seen as less worthy of respect, inviting and more prone to be raped.\n\nI'm gonna stop you right there. \nSource? \nBecause that's nothing but misogynistic bullshit.",
">\n\nLet's go point by point: \n\npromiscuous people are less respected By whom? If someone is being unfaithful to their partner, that's another story, but someone with no agreements to be monogamous can do whatever they want. \npromiscuous people make themselves be less disrespected Nope. Judgmental people are choosing to disrespect people for having consensual sex that they disapprove of.\nwomen are making themselves and other women be disrespected by dressing or acting 'slutty' If you lose your respect for me just because my shorts are a bit shorter or I'm wearing a crop top, that is on you. I try to judge people based on their kindness, honesty, and accomplishments, not on what they're wearing or if they flirt with strangers.\na person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone First, no, they're not having sex with just anyone. They are choosing who they want to have sex with. Second, the idea of \"lending one's body\" doesn't make a lot of sense. When I have sex with my partner, it's both of us agreeing to do an activity that we both enjoy and find meaningful. Her body is still hers and my body is still mine, we are just agreeing to touch each other's bodies and be touched in intimate ways that we both really enjoy. \n\npromiscuous behavior doesn't make sense because it doesn't value meaningful relationships and is mere pleasure Not all actions that a person takes have to be based on meaningful relationships. Someone can be promiscuous and have strong, healthy relationships with their friends and family. Just because they don't want to be monogamous at the moment doesn't mean that they are shallow or superficial. Secondly, I do a lot of things with other people that are strictly for the purposes of pleasure as opposed to developing meaningful relationships. I play online board games with strangers just to enjoy myself and I never pursue a relationship beyond occasionally texting \"gg\" at the end. It's fine because that's not the only way I interact with other people. \n\n\npromiscuous people let people do whatever they want with their body I disagree with this point. Agreeing to have sex with someone isn't agreeing to let them do whatever they want to their body, but agreeing to have certain types of intimate contact. For example, if Jane and Thomas meet up at a bar and decide to hook up, Jane might agree to have Thomas suck her nipples but not finger her anus and Thomas might be ok with receiving a blow job but not with being spanked. It's between the two of them what they want to do together in order to both have a safe and enjoyable time. If Jane wanted to peg Thomas, who didn't want that, and she did that anyway, that would be sexual assault, not promiscuity. If Thomas forced Jane to give him a blowjob, again, sexual assault.",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure\n\nBeing promiscuous and valuing personal relationships are not mutually exclusive at all. It doesn't take monogamy to value personal relationships. As someone in a long term open relationship, the fact that my partner and I both fuck other guys says very little about the value of our relationship.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nSpeaking as a slutty person I can tell you that being promiscuous doesn't mean people let everyone do whatever they want with their body (not that there's anything wrong with that). And consenting to sex with other consenting adults I guess is \"letting yourself be used,\" but it's not a bad thing. You're framing it as though people get nothing out of it. I have some fun, you have some fun, everybody wins and we all go on with life. There's nothing inherently bad about this.",
">\n\nThe first thing you have to accept is that the women of whom you speak are not dressing the way they do to seduce men; they are dressing that way to impress other women, and not in a lesbian way but rather in a one-up kind of way.",
">\n\nYou never explained why casual sex devalues someone. \nWhat’s the issue with someone who has sex with people because it feels good, it’s relaxing, and makes them feel good about themselves? Does everything have to be a higher level connection? So long as they use protection and it’s consensual, what’s the issue?\nIs masturbation devaluing yourself too? Since it’s just physical pleasure?\nWhat if you’re horny but don’t have anyone to be in a serious relationship with at the moment? You just shouldn’t have sex? Sex is a physical need in the same way as food, water, and shelter.",
">\n\nI don't know where you are from but here, sex is an act of pleasure many people participate in. To think that enjoying sex somehow makes you less valuable is hard for me to understand. I mean, we were all born wanting some you know? \nThe limit of one person to play with is inspired by religious institutions like the one famous for raping little boys or the one famous for not letting women drive work go to school or show ankles. Hardly role models we should follow. \nLive your life!",
">\n\nI don't lend someone my body when I have sex with them, or let them do whatever they want to me. And there's nothing about me (or about my partner) that is diminished in the act of sex. \nI'm sure there are promiscuous people who don't value themselves, but the are also chaste people who don't value themselves. Self respect isn't a matter of keeping everyone at a specific pre-defined distance, it's about setting and enforcing the boundaries that you want to have."
] |
>
Replace the word "sex" in your comment with another mutually pleasurable two party activity like badminton or backgammon and see how insane you sound. From that I think you might be able to realise that the problem here is you have hang ups about sex and don't view it as a simple mutually pleasurable two party activity. Which is your cross to bear, but why should other people be forced to buy in to your hangups? | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal.",
">\n\nOkay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's.",
">\n\nBecause unwanted pregnancies only happened to women. \nYou gotta remember we're talking about a time when starvation and plague (from things that we can easily cure today) was an everyday thing. Getting pregnant from some random dude was very bad. You might die in childbirth. If you don't you're unlikely to have the means to take care of the kid.",
">\n\nThere were ways to have abortions and they were used. Don't forget during the time the bible was made an abortion could be ordered on the husband's say so.",
">\n\n\nA person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them.\n\nSure, and this is only an issue if you believe that this intimate part is somehow \"sacred\" and/or \"gets damaged\" by continuous use.\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nAnd people do superficial things for pleasure - why it is inherently bad? If I f.ex. go to a board game pub and play a round of a game with a complete rando and then go away - I did the same, I never valued that personal relationship, it was superficial and I did it for pleasure - cause I wanted to play a game. Would that mean that someone who is frequenting a board game pub does not value themselves?\nI think that shows that only reason for this whole \"don't value themselves\" comes strictly from seeing sex as some kind of sacred union between two chosen people.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\n\nYou are slightly overexaggerating to feel better about an argument. Promiscuous people don't let \"everyone\" do \"whatever\" to their body - they let selected people do exactly what they want to their body.\n\nThey are letting themselves be used.\n\nAnd \"use\" other people, that is how this works - that is how every single human-human relation works.",
">\n\nPeople that go out and play casual board games with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected.\nA person that plays board games with many people lends their time and company to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them. Also, casual game playing behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think casual board game players have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their time and company. They are letting themselves be used.",
">\n\nAnd it comes further, this makes people believe they can take advantage of others with similar behaviors. Such as lurking in board game pubs and preying on those who were led into thinking that lifestyle is cool, buying them few drinks and then, my God, playing \"Monopoly\" with them.",
">\n\nCasual sex doesn't have to be as hedonistic as you're describing it to be. For some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\nBut casual sex can also be done safely and healthily. Viewing sex as a sacred thing doesn't mean it can only be experienced that way in a fulfilling monogamous relationship (though that is a great place for it). One can also have a \"sacred\" sexual experience casually, as it's just another way to explore their sexuality, which is an important part of what it means to be human. \nSometimes a deep romantic relationship just isn't in the cards for someone because of the place they're at in life or whatever reason. But they still, if they want to in the meantime, ought to have some way to have sexual experiences and fulfill that part of them. Or maybe they're not looking for a romantic relationship in general. \nAnd it's not simply \"letting everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\" Having the autonomy to choose to engage in casual sex and give someone access to them in a sexual way I believe can be more empowering than maybe you realize. \nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.",
">\n\n∆\n\nFor some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\n\nI was probably focusing too much on that part that I forgot that not everyone does it with the same purpose or that there's something bad with them.\n\nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.\n\nAnd that's what I thought before my friend changed my mind (that resulted in this post). Everyone can do whatever they want with their lives as long as it doesn't impact someone else negatively.",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Mundane-Magazine-229 (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n\nI say \"people\" because this goes for men as well, I think they disrespect themselves, but since society rewards men for sleeping with many women and punishes women for sleeping with many men, they don't make other men look bad like women do.\n\nWhy should the fact that society slut-shames women make promiscuity more acceptable for men?\nI suspect it's more that you say \"people\" rather than \"women\" because if you explicitly target women with this criticism it's more obviously misogynist. This is further evidenced by phrases like \"letting themselves be used,\" which typically is applied only to women by people who believe men are the only ones with sexual agency.",
">\n\nI'll go in more depth, but first which joyless humanity despising religious tradition are you part of?",
">\n\nI was raised in a christian household, thankfully not too extreme. This post came from the idea my friend gave me while discussing that convinced me because I couldn't find a better answer (that's why I made this post). She's christian as well, and more extreme. We usually disagree about our views and it's very rare of me to change my mind, but the argument trapped me.\nIn fact I'm non-religious and the \"people can do whatever they want if they like it and it's fine\" type of person.",
">\n\nPeople \"value themselves\" in relation to whatever values they hold, and, in a pluralistic society, people subscribe to different, and even contradictory, values: both a pacifist and a soldier are \"valuing themselves,\" even if one would find the other immoral, because they are doing the right thing (or at least not something objectionable) relative to their own values. \nLikewise, the people who do have frequent casual sex and the other who only have it within the context of a relationship can both be \"valuing themselves,\" insofar that they likely have different values they are abiding by.",
">\n\n\nit's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure\n\nLet's say Bob has a distance relationship with Dee. For practical reasons, they decide to be polyamorous, as they and their long distance partner don't have the means to travel often, and they want physical intimacy more often than they can meet up.\nIf Bob meets someone local, they've got a baseline of what good treatment is from Bob's relationship with Dee. So, they are more likely to have the confidence and self-respect, if faced from abuse or disrespect from a local prospective partner, to walk away.\nSomeone who is monogamous could be easier to be convinced that they have no other options and have to settle for an abusive partner who \"cares\" about them.\nI know several poly people, and I don't think they're more superficial than other people I know.",
">\n\nI am polyamorous. I find this extremely offensive.\nI guess that means I value at least a part of myself.",
">\n\nPeople don't have to ask you for permission for their sex lives. \nThey get to make choices that you won't agree with. And they get to ignore your ideas when it come to what they want to do with their life.\nif a person wants to wear revealing clothes that's something they can do and it doesn't have any bearing on who they are as a person. If they want to have sex with people that doesn't have any bearing on who they are as a person.",
">\n\n\nSome weeks ago I was discussing with a friend about how women that dress \"provocatively\" are seen as less worthy of respect, inviting and more prone to be raped.\n\nI'm gonna stop you right there. \nSource? \nBecause that's nothing but misogynistic bullshit.",
">\n\nLet's go point by point: \n\npromiscuous people are less respected By whom? If someone is being unfaithful to their partner, that's another story, but someone with no agreements to be monogamous can do whatever they want. \npromiscuous people make themselves be less disrespected Nope. Judgmental people are choosing to disrespect people for having consensual sex that they disapprove of.\nwomen are making themselves and other women be disrespected by dressing or acting 'slutty' If you lose your respect for me just because my shorts are a bit shorter or I'm wearing a crop top, that is on you. I try to judge people based on their kindness, honesty, and accomplishments, not on what they're wearing or if they flirt with strangers.\na person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone First, no, they're not having sex with just anyone. They are choosing who they want to have sex with. Second, the idea of \"lending one's body\" doesn't make a lot of sense. When I have sex with my partner, it's both of us agreeing to do an activity that we both enjoy and find meaningful. Her body is still hers and my body is still mine, we are just agreeing to touch each other's bodies and be touched in intimate ways that we both really enjoy. \n\npromiscuous behavior doesn't make sense because it doesn't value meaningful relationships and is mere pleasure Not all actions that a person takes have to be based on meaningful relationships. Someone can be promiscuous and have strong, healthy relationships with their friends and family. Just because they don't want to be monogamous at the moment doesn't mean that they are shallow or superficial. Secondly, I do a lot of things with other people that are strictly for the purposes of pleasure as opposed to developing meaningful relationships. I play online board games with strangers just to enjoy myself and I never pursue a relationship beyond occasionally texting \"gg\" at the end. It's fine because that's not the only way I interact with other people. \n\n\npromiscuous people let people do whatever they want with their body I disagree with this point. Agreeing to have sex with someone isn't agreeing to let them do whatever they want to their body, but agreeing to have certain types of intimate contact. For example, if Jane and Thomas meet up at a bar and decide to hook up, Jane might agree to have Thomas suck her nipples but not finger her anus and Thomas might be ok with receiving a blow job but not with being spanked. It's between the two of them what they want to do together in order to both have a safe and enjoyable time. If Jane wanted to peg Thomas, who didn't want that, and she did that anyway, that would be sexual assault, not promiscuity. If Thomas forced Jane to give him a blowjob, again, sexual assault.",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure\n\nBeing promiscuous and valuing personal relationships are not mutually exclusive at all. It doesn't take monogamy to value personal relationships. As someone in a long term open relationship, the fact that my partner and I both fuck other guys says very little about the value of our relationship.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nSpeaking as a slutty person I can tell you that being promiscuous doesn't mean people let everyone do whatever they want with their body (not that there's anything wrong with that). And consenting to sex with other consenting adults I guess is \"letting yourself be used,\" but it's not a bad thing. You're framing it as though people get nothing out of it. I have some fun, you have some fun, everybody wins and we all go on with life. There's nothing inherently bad about this.",
">\n\nThe first thing you have to accept is that the women of whom you speak are not dressing the way they do to seduce men; they are dressing that way to impress other women, and not in a lesbian way but rather in a one-up kind of way.",
">\n\nYou never explained why casual sex devalues someone. \nWhat’s the issue with someone who has sex with people because it feels good, it’s relaxing, and makes them feel good about themselves? Does everything have to be a higher level connection? So long as they use protection and it’s consensual, what’s the issue?\nIs masturbation devaluing yourself too? Since it’s just physical pleasure?\nWhat if you’re horny but don’t have anyone to be in a serious relationship with at the moment? You just shouldn’t have sex? Sex is a physical need in the same way as food, water, and shelter.",
">\n\nI don't know where you are from but here, sex is an act of pleasure many people participate in. To think that enjoying sex somehow makes you less valuable is hard for me to understand. I mean, we were all born wanting some you know? \nThe limit of one person to play with is inspired by religious institutions like the one famous for raping little boys or the one famous for not letting women drive work go to school or show ankles. Hardly role models we should follow. \nLive your life!",
">\n\nI don't lend someone my body when I have sex with them, or let them do whatever they want to me. And there's nothing about me (or about my partner) that is diminished in the act of sex. \nI'm sure there are promiscuous people who don't value themselves, but the are also chaste people who don't value themselves. Self respect isn't a matter of keeping everyone at a specific pre-defined distance, it's about setting and enforcing the boundaries that you want to have.",
">\n\nWhat doesn't make sense about promiscuous sex? Sex feels good. A lot of people are hot. You can think it's immoral but it's not exactly a paradox or a logic puzzle as to why people do it."
] |
>
"A person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone."
This doesn't follow. It's an artifact of binary thinking where EITHER you have sex only in the context of at most ONE committed romantic relationship, or else you "lend your body to anyone".
But the world isn't binary like that.
I have 4 current sex-partners: two girlfriends and two friends with benefits. All of these people are among the people closest to me, and have been for many years; I've for example known both my girlfriends for about 8 years.
In my subculture, most people see nothing at all wrong with having multiple partners. Values like honesty and openness are crucial, but there's no conflict at all about that; all of my sex-partners know about each other and indeed most of them are friends. (Nor is that limited to me; both my girlfriends have two other partners each.)
I see the opposite of devaluing ourselves in this. I see a willingness to live life honestly as the people we are, even if some of it causes parts of mainstream society to get their panties in a twist about it.
Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them
If you define anything above 1 as "lots" then sure. But is that reasonable? Isn't that another example of amatonormativity, of pretending there's some kinda logical reason why ONE is the only acceptable number of sex-partners, and anything above that automatically is equivalent to "lots", regardless of how picky people are?
promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.
Is there something inherently wrong with pleasure? Yes some people enjoy having sex that is not part of a deeper relationship. Assuming they do this in an open and honest way: are they harming anyone by it? Is it objectionable in any way? If so, why?
But this isn't necessarily the case for all people who have multiple partners. I care deeply about all the people I have sex with, and I'm in committed romantic relationships with my two girlfriends. The relationships are not shallower or more superficial than the monogamous relationships I had earlier in my life; including a 16 year long marriage that I had.
One of the women I love has been in my life for 14 years. We've been each others pillar of support through some of the hardest things that's ever happened to either of us. And I have every expectation that we'll love each other for ever. And yet this particular relationship is not sexual and we've never as much as kissed. So where's the support for the idea that it's all mere pleasure and there's no value put on personal relationships? | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal.",
">\n\nOkay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's.",
">\n\nBecause unwanted pregnancies only happened to women. \nYou gotta remember we're talking about a time when starvation and plague (from things that we can easily cure today) was an everyday thing. Getting pregnant from some random dude was very bad. You might die in childbirth. If you don't you're unlikely to have the means to take care of the kid.",
">\n\nThere were ways to have abortions and they were used. Don't forget during the time the bible was made an abortion could be ordered on the husband's say so.",
">\n\n\nA person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them.\n\nSure, and this is only an issue if you believe that this intimate part is somehow \"sacred\" and/or \"gets damaged\" by continuous use.\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nAnd people do superficial things for pleasure - why it is inherently bad? If I f.ex. go to a board game pub and play a round of a game with a complete rando and then go away - I did the same, I never valued that personal relationship, it was superficial and I did it for pleasure - cause I wanted to play a game. Would that mean that someone who is frequenting a board game pub does not value themselves?\nI think that shows that only reason for this whole \"don't value themselves\" comes strictly from seeing sex as some kind of sacred union between two chosen people.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\n\nYou are slightly overexaggerating to feel better about an argument. Promiscuous people don't let \"everyone\" do \"whatever\" to their body - they let selected people do exactly what they want to their body.\n\nThey are letting themselves be used.\n\nAnd \"use\" other people, that is how this works - that is how every single human-human relation works.",
">\n\nPeople that go out and play casual board games with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected.\nA person that plays board games with many people lends their time and company to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them. Also, casual game playing behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think casual board game players have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their time and company. They are letting themselves be used.",
">\n\nAnd it comes further, this makes people believe they can take advantage of others with similar behaviors. Such as lurking in board game pubs and preying on those who were led into thinking that lifestyle is cool, buying them few drinks and then, my God, playing \"Monopoly\" with them.",
">\n\nCasual sex doesn't have to be as hedonistic as you're describing it to be. For some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\nBut casual sex can also be done safely and healthily. Viewing sex as a sacred thing doesn't mean it can only be experienced that way in a fulfilling monogamous relationship (though that is a great place for it). One can also have a \"sacred\" sexual experience casually, as it's just another way to explore their sexuality, which is an important part of what it means to be human. \nSometimes a deep romantic relationship just isn't in the cards for someone because of the place they're at in life or whatever reason. But they still, if they want to in the meantime, ought to have some way to have sexual experiences and fulfill that part of them. Or maybe they're not looking for a romantic relationship in general. \nAnd it's not simply \"letting everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\" Having the autonomy to choose to engage in casual sex and give someone access to them in a sexual way I believe can be more empowering than maybe you realize. \nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.",
">\n\n∆\n\nFor some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\n\nI was probably focusing too much on that part that I forgot that not everyone does it with the same purpose or that there's something bad with them.\n\nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.\n\nAnd that's what I thought before my friend changed my mind (that resulted in this post). Everyone can do whatever they want with their lives as long as it doesn't impact someone else negatively.",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Mundane-Magazine-229 (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n\nI say \"people\" because this goes for men as well, I think they disrespect themselves, but since society rewards men for sleeping with many women and punishes women for sleeping with many men, they don't make other men look bad like women do.\n\nWhy should the fact that society slut-shames women make promiscuity more acceptable for men?\nI suspect it's more that you say \"people\" rather than \"women\" because if you explicitly target women with this criticism it's more obviously misogynist. This is further evidenced by phrases like \"letting themselves be used,\" which typically is applied only to women by people who believe men are the only ones with sexual agency.",
">\n\nI'll go in more depth, but first which joyless humanity despising religious tradition are you part of?",
">\n\nI was raised in a christian household, thankfully not too extreme. This post came from the idea my friend gave me while discussing that convinced me because I couldn't find a better answer (that's why I made this post). She's christian as well, and more extreme. We usually disagree about our views and it's very rare of me to change my mind, but the argument trapped me.\nIn fact I'm non-religious and the \"people can do whatever they want if they like it and it's fine\" type of person.",
">\n\nPeople \"value themselves\" in relation to whatever values they hold, and, in a pluralistic society, people subscribe to different, and even contradictory, values: both a pacifist and a soldier are \"valuing themselves,\" even if one would find the other immoral, because they are doing the right thing (or at least not something objectionable) relative to their own values. \nLikewise, the people who do have frequent casual sex and the other who only have it within the context of a relationship can both be \"valuing themselves,\" insofar that they likely have different values they are abiding by.",
">\n\n\nit's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure\n\nLet's say Bob has a distance relationship with Dee. For practical reasons, they decide to be polyamorous, as they and their long distance partner don't have the means to travel often, and they want physical intimacy more often than they can meet up.\nIf Bob meets someone local, they've got a baseline of what good treatment is from Bob's relationship with Dee. So, they are more likely to have the confidence and self-respect, if faced from abuse or disrespect from a local prospective partner, to walk away.\nSomeone who is monogamous could be easier to be convinced that they have no other options and have to settle for an abusive partner who \"cares\" about them.\nI know several poly people, and I don't think they're more superficial than other people I know.",
">\n\nI am polyamorous. I find this extremely offensive.\nI guess that means I value at least a part of myself.",
">\n\nPeople don't have to ask you for permission for their sex lives. \nThey get to make choices that you won't agree with. And they get to ignore your ideas when it come to what they want to do with their life.\nif a person wants to wear revealing clothes that's something they can do and it doesn't have any bearing on who they are as a person. If they want to have sex with people that doesn't have any bearing on who they are as a person.",
">\n\n\nSome weeks ago I was discussing with a friend about how women that dress \"provocatively\" are seen as less worthy of respect, inviting and more prone to be raped.\n\nI'm gonna stop you right there. \nSource? \nBecause that's nothing but misogynistic bullshit.",
">\n\nLet's go point by point: \n\npromiscuous people are less respected By whom? If someone is being unfaithful to their partner, that's another story, but someone with no agreements to be monogamous can do whatever they want. \npromiscuous people make themselves be less disrespected Nope. Judgmental people are choosing to disrespect people for having consensual sex that they disapprove of.\nwomen are making themselves and other women be disrespected by dressing or acting 'slutty' If you lose your respect for me just because my shorts are a bit shorter or I'm wearing a crop top, that is on you. I try to judge people based on their kindness, honesty, and accomplishments, not on what they're wearing or if they flirt with strangers.\na person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone First, no, they're not having sex with just anyone. They are choosing who they want to have sex with. Second, the idea of \"lending one's body\" doesn't make a lot of sense. When I have sex with my partner, it's both of us agreeing to do an activity that we both enjoy and find meaningful. Her body is still hers and my body is still mine, we are just agreeing to touch each other's bodies and be touched in intimate ways that we both really enjoy. \n\npromiscuous behavior doesn't make sense because it doesn't value meaningful relationships and is mere pleasure Not all actions that a person takes have to be based on meaningful relationships. Someone can be promiscuous and have strong, healthy relationships with their friends and family. Just because they don't want to be monogamous at the moment doesn't mean that they are shallow or superficial. Secondly, I do a lot of things with other people that are strictly for the purposes of pleasure as opposed to developing meaningful relationships. I play online board games with strangers just to enjoy myself and I never pursue a relationship beyond occasionally texting \"gg\" at the end. It's fine because that's not the only way I interact with other people. \n\n\npromiscuous people let people do whatever they want with their body I disagree with this point. Agreeing to have sex with someone isn't agreeing to let them do whatever they want to their body, but agreeing to have certain types of intimate contact. For example, if Jane and Thomas meet up at a bar and decide to hook up, Jane might agree to have Thomas suck her nipples but not finger her anus and Thomas might be ok with receiving a blow job but not with being spanked. It's between the two of them what they want to do together in order to both have a safe and enjoyable time. If Jane wanted to peg Thomas, who didn't want that, and she did that anyway, that would be sexual assault, not promiscuity. If Thomas forced Jane to give him a blowjob, again, sexual assault.",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure\n\nBeing promiscuous and valuing personal relationships are not mutually exclusive at all. It doesn't take monogamy to value personal relationships. As someone in a long term open relationship, the fact that my partner and I both fuck other guys says very little about the value of our relationship.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nSpeaking as a slutty person I can tell you that being promiscuous doesn't mean people let everyone do whatever they want with their body (not that there's anything wrong with that). And consenting to sex with other consenting adults I guess is \"letting yourself be used,\" but it's not a bad thing. You're framing it as though people get nothing out of it. I have some fun, you have some fun, everybody wins and we all go on with life. There's nothing inherently bad about this.",
">\n\nThe first thing you have to accept is that the women of whom you speak are not dressing the way they do to seduce men; they are dressing that way to impress other women, and not in a lesbian way but rather in a one-up kind of way.",
">\n\nYou never explained why casual sex devalues someone. \nWhat’s the issue with someone who has sex with people because it feels good, it’s relaxing, and makes them feel good about themselves? Does everything have to be a higher level connection? So long as they use protection and it’s consensual, what’s the issue?\nIs masturbation devaluing yourself too? Since it’s just physical pleasure?\nWhat if you’re horny but don’t have anyone to be in a serious relationship with at the moment? You just shouldn’t have sex? Sex is a physical need in the same way as food, water, and shelter.",
">\n\nI don't know where you are from but here, sex is an act of pleasure many people participate in. To think that enjoying sex somehow makes you less valuable is hard for me to understand. I mean, we were all born wanting some you know? \nThe limit of one person to play with is inspired by religious institutions like the one famous for raping little boys or the one famous for not letting women drive work go to school or show ankles. Hardly role models we should follow. \nLive your life!",
">\n\nI don't lend someone my body when I have sex with them, or let them do whatever they want to me. And there's nothing about me (or about my partner) that is diminished in the act of sex. \nI'm sure there are promiscuous people who don't value themselves, but the are also chaste people who don't value themselves. Self respect isn't a matter of keeping everyone at a specific pre-defined distance, it's about setting and enforcing the boundaries that you want to have.",
">\n\nWhat doesn't make sense about promiscuous sex? Sex feels good. A lot of people are hot. You can think it's immoral but it's not exactly a paradox or a logic puzzle as to why people do it.",
">\n\nReplace the word \"sex\" in your comment with another mutually pleasurable two party activity like badminton or backgammon and see how insane you sound. From that I think you might be able to realise that the problem here is you have hang ups about sex and don't view it as a simple mutually pleasurable two party activity. Which is your cross to bear, but why should other people be forced to buy in to your hangups?"
] |
> | [
"/u/Lyrae-NightWolf (OP) has awarded 3 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nYou might want to edit your post; you forgot the part that explains why having multiple sex partners is shameful or bad. It will be hard for us to change your view when you haven't fully given it.",
">\n\nClothing doesn't make a difference when it comes to rape.\nNot everyone thinks that sex is sacred or find it disrespectful to one night stands, maybe they value themselves alot, know they're desired and enjoy having a choice of people to sleep with.",
">\n\nGood point. For the clothing, it is true, but in my experience dressing provocatively makes men pay more attention to you (and with attention I mean the type of attention that comes unasked)",
">\n\nSo if you want attention it means you don't respect yourself?",
">\n\nThere is nothing disrespectful to myself about sharing an intimate experience with another person. That's the heart of the problem with your argument: it's fundamentally circular, because you're going \"you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners so you're disrespecting yourself if you have many partners\".\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWe don't seek personal relationships with everyone. Sometimes we just do things we like to do. That doesn't mean we don't seek out personal relationships in other spheres of our lives, it just means we don't tie that specific bit of sex to them.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nYou're, uh, really telling on yourself a little bit about your views of sex here.\nSex isn't party A using party B. Or at least, it shouldn't be. Sex should be party A and party B going \"hey, do you want to do thing C?\" and both party A and party B going \"yes, I would enjoy that\". And then they go do Thing C together, and ideally, parties A and B both have a good time, and then they go \"that was fun\". If I give a guy head, I'm not doing it for his benefit (except perhaps in the way I would try to do something nice for someone in other contexts), I'm doing it because I like doing that and it is fun for me.\nNow, yes, there is such a thing as people with not-particularly-healthy needs that leave them vulnerable to manipulation or abuse. And those people probably shouldn't have a bunch of casual partners. But not because having casual partners is bad, just because they're vulnerable to bad ones and should avoid rolling the dice too much.",
">\n\nTalk ur shit!!",
">\n\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nThat's ... that's not what sex is, and if you think it is, I feel that's more of a you problem",
">\n\nit is not clear what link you see between self respect and letting people use your body, pls explain",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nWhy does that not make sense? Not everyone places high value on personal relationships, and even those who do don't always place a high value on them all the time. Just as there are some people who are interested in a romantic relationship but unconcerned with sexual fulfilment, so too are there people who are interested in sexual fulfilment but unconcerned with a romantic relationship. Human behaviour is never binary, it occurs across a spectrum, with various groups dotted along from one extreme to the other.",
">\n\nProbably because it focuses on hedonism",
">\n\nRepeat after me: Enjoying Yourself Is Not Bad.",
">\n\nI think the problem here is they are not “letting themselves be used”. They are having fun, sex is suppose to be fun and enjoyable i feel like people who say this have never had an orgasm in their lives.",
">\n\n\nPeople that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected and making women (in the case of a woman) be disrespected as well if they act or dress \"slutty\"\n\nBut why / how?\nAnd why is a mutually beneficial act someone being 'used'? \nIt's \"being used\" as much as a husband and wife (or whatever) \"use\" each other. In that way, it's the same. So, why the double-standard?",
">\n\n\"women that dress \"provocatively\" are ...................... more prone to be raped\"\n\nWrong: The idea that provocatively dressed women are more prone to sexual assault has been debunked by multiple reputable sources including the justice Department, RAINN, and the Federal Commission on Crime of Violence. Additionally, research has shown that rapists are more likely to target individuals who they perceive as passive or meek which is also seen in traditionally more conservative clothing styles long pants, loose shirts etc. (Ohio state U). In fact, many rapists do not even remember what their victims were wearing at the time of the assault. This information is important to consider, as it helps to refocus the conversation away from victim blaming and towards holding perpetrators accountable for their actions\n\n\"People that go out and have casual sex with different people are disrespecting themselves\"\n\nNot a fact. This statement is false because it is based on the assumption that engaging in casual sexual relationships is inherently disrespectful to oneself. However, this is a subjective belief and not a fact because this belief is based on the assumption that there is only one \"right\" way to express one's sexuality, and that any deviation from this is inherently disrespectful. However, this is not true. Different people have different values and beliefs about what is and is not respectful to themselves. Some people may believe that engaging in casual sexual relationships is not respectful to themselves, while others may feel perfectly comfortable and empowered by such experiences. It is important to respect and recognize that different people have different beliefs and boundaries when it comes to their own sexuality.\n\n\"Promiscuous behavior doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\"\n\nIt is not fair or accurate to suggest that promiscuous behavior is inherently superficial or lacks value. In fact, people who engage in casual sexual relationships often do so for a variety of reasons and may place value on pleasure, personal connection, or other factors. For many people, casual sex is a way to explore and understand their own sexuality, and this can be a deeply meaningful and valuable experience. In many cultures, exploring one's own sexuality or losing one's virginity outside of marriage is highly taboo, and this can lead to people feeling ashamed or hiding their true selves for their entire lives. This can be especially true for LGBTQ individuals, who may face social ostracization, discrimination, and even violence if they are open about their sexuality. By engaging in casual sexual relationships, some people may feel empowered to take control of their own pleasure and preferences, rather than feeling used or denied in a society that often suppresses sexuality. It is important to recognize that casual sex means different things to different people, and it cannot be reduced to one-dimensional judgments about superficiality or self-worth.",
">\n\n∆\nYou have very good points. You changed my mind in the part about the clothes. I already knew that it was more about the body lenguage and the \"passive\" victims than the clothes but it confirms it even more.\nAnd that there are many sexual practices that are not inherently bad (unless they are illegal)",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Qat-lover (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n“More prone to be raped”\nRapist rape children in diapers bro. \nIf someone is looking for a victim, the cut of her dress isn’t going to make them look elsewhere.",
">\n\nYes because we are pieces of gum, cars, and tissues.\nWhen I die I'm going to request to go to hell so I can beat up who made purity culture.",
">\n\nThey made up purity culture back when we didn't have medicine and most people lived off less than $2 a day. STDs and unwanted pregnancies were a death sentence for many people. Being a prude was the absolute best way to carry yourself back then. \nToday with modern medicine, contraceptives and significantly better access to food etc. It's not as big of a deal.",
">\n\nOkay fair, but even then it was more women they pushed. They didn't care about pregnancy or illness but about if a kid was actually a husband's.",
">\n\nBecause unwanted pregnancies only happened to women. \nYou gotta remember we're talking about a time when starvation and plague (from things that we can easily cure today) was an everyday thing. Getting pregnant from some random dude was very bad. You might die in childbirth. If you don't you're unlikely to have the means to take care of the kid.",
">\n\nThere were ways to have abortions and they were used. Don't forget during the time the bible was made an abortion could be ordered on the husband's say so.",
">\n\n\nA person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them.\n\nSure, and this is only an issue if you believe that this intimate part is somehow \"sacred\" and/or \"gets damaged\" by continuous use.\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nAnd people do superficial things for pleasure - why it is inherently bad? If I f.ex. go to a board game pub and play a round of a game with a complete rando and then go away - I did the same, I never valued that personal relationship, it was superficial and I did it for pleasure - cause I wanted to play a game. Would that mean that someone who is frequenting a board game pub does not value themselves?\nI think that shows that only reason for this whole \"don't value themselves\" comes strictly from seeing sex as some kind of sacred union between two chosen people.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\n\nYou are slightly overexaggerating to feel better about an argument. Promiscuous people don't let \"everyone\" do \"whatever\" to their body - they let selected people do exactly what they want to their body.\n\nThey are letting themselves be used.\n\nAnd \"use\" other people, that is how this works - that is how every single human-human relation works.",
">\n\nPeople that go out and play casual board games with different people are disrespecting themselves, making themselves be disrespected.\nA person that plays board games with many people lends their time and company to anyone. Even if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them. Also, casual game playing behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure. I think casual board game players have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their time and company. They are letting themselves be used.",
">\n\nAnd it comes further, this makes people believe they can take advantage of others with similar behaviors. Such as lurking in board game pubs and preying on those who were led into thinking that lifestyle is cool, buying them few drinks and then, my God, playing \"Monopoly\" with them.",
">\n\nCasual sex doesn't have to be as hedonistic as you're describing it to be. For some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\nBut casual sex can also be done safely and healthily. Viewing sex as a sacred thing doesn't mean it can only be experienced that way in a fulfilling monogamous relationship (though that is a great place for it). One can also have a \"sacred\" sexual experience casually, as it's just another way to explore their sexuality, which is an important part of what it means to be human. \nSometimes a deep romantic relationship just isn't in the cards for someone because of the place they're at in life or whatever reason. But they still, if they want to in the meantime, ought to have some way to have sexual experiences and fulfill that part of them. Or maybe they're not looking for a romantic relationship in general. \nAnd it's not simply \"letting everyone to do whatever they want with their body.\" Having the autonomy to choose to engage in casual sex and give someone access to them in a sexual way I believe can be more empowering than maybe you realize. \nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.",
">\n\n∆\n\nFor some people it may be that way, just purely an act of desperation to get some dopamine, because they are lacking something in their life. Or it could be to fuel a sex addiction. In those situations, yeah it can be unhealthy.\n\nI was probably focusing too much on that part that I forgot that not everyone does it with the same purpose or that there's something bad with them.\n\nAs long as it's safe, with another like-minded consenting adult, then I don't think it's as unhealthy and \"disrespectful\" to oneself to have casual sex.\n\nAnd that's what I thought before my friend changed my mind (that resulted in this post). Everyone can do whatever they want with their lives as long as it doesn't impact someone else negatively.",
">\n\nConfirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Mundane-Magazine-229 (1∆).\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\n\nI say \"people\" because this goes for men as well, I think they disrespect themselves, but since society rewards men for sleeping with many women and punishes women for sleeping with many men, they don't make other men look bad like women do.\n\nWhy should the fact that society slut-shames women make promiscuity more acceptable for men?\nI suspect it's more that you say \"people\" rather than \"women\" because if you explicitly target women with this criticism it's more obviously misogynist. This is further evidenced by phrases like \"letting themselves be used,\" which typically is applied only to women by people who believe men are the only ones with sexual agency.",
">\n\nI'll go in more depth, but first which joyless humanity despising religious tradition are you part of?",
">\n\nI was raised in a christian household, thankfully not too extreme. This post came from the idea my friend gave me while discussing that convinced me because I couldn't find a better answer (that's why I made this post). She's christian as well, and more extreme. We usually disagree about our views and it's very rare of me to change my mind, but the argument trapped me.\nIn fact I'm non-religious and the \"people can do whatever they want if they like it and it's fine\" type of person.",
">\n\nPeople \"value themselves\" in relation to whatever values they hold, and, in a pluralistic society, people subscribe to different, and even contradictory, values: both a pacifist and a soldier are \"valuing themselves,\" even if one would find the other immoral, because they are doing the right thing (or at least not something objectionable) relative to their own values. \nLikewise, the people who do have frequent casual sex and the other who only have it within the context of a relationship can both be \"valuing themselves,\" insofar that they likely have different values they are abiding by.",
">\n\n\nit's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure\n\nLet's say Bob has a distance relationship with Dee. For practical reasons, they decide to be polyamorous, as they and their long distance partner don't have the means to travel often, and they want physical intimacy more often than they can meet up.\nIf Bob meets someone local, they've got a baseline of what good treatment is from Bob's relationship with Dee. So, they are more likely to have the confidence and self-respect, if faced from abuse or disrespect from a local prospective partner, to walk away.\nSomeone who is monogamous could be easier to be convinced that they have no other options and have to settle for an abusive partner who \"cares\" about them.\nI know several poly people, and I don't think they're more superficial than other people I know.",
">\n\nI am polyamorous. I find this extremely offensive.\nI guess that means I value at least a part of myself.",
">\n\nPeople don't have to ask you for permission for their sex lives. \nThey get to make choices that you won't agree with. And they get to ignore your ideas when it come to what they want to do with their life.\nif a person wants to wear revealing clothes that's something they can do and it doesn't have any bearing on who they are as a person. If they want to have sex with people that doesn't have any bearing on who they are as a person.",
">\n\n\nSome weeks ago I was discussing with a friend about how women that dress \"provocatively\" are seen as less worthy of respect, inviting and more prone to be raped.\n\nI'm gonna stop you right there. \nSource? \nBecause that's nothing but misogynistic bullshit.",
">\n\nLet's go point by point: \n\npromiscuous people are less respected By whom? If someone is being unfaithful to their partner, that's another story, but someone with no agreements to be monogamous can do whatever they want. \npromiscuous people make themselves be less disrespected Nope. Judgmental people are choosing to disrespect people for having consensual sex that they disapprove of.\nwomen are making themselves and other women be disrespected by dressing or acting 'slutty' If you lose your respect for me just because my shorts are a bit shorter or I'm wearing a crop top, that is on you. I try to judge people based on their kindness, honesty, and accomplishments, not on what they're wearing or if they flirt with strangers.\na person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone First, no, they're not having sex with just anyone. They are choosing who they want to have sex with. Second, the idea of \"lending one's body\" doesn't make a lot of sense. When I have sex with my partner, it's both of us agreeing to do an activity that we both enjoy and find meaningful. Her body is still hers and my body is still mine, we are just agreeing to touch each other's bodies and be touched in intimate ways that we both really enjoy. \n\npromiscuous behavior doesn't make sense because it doesn't value meaningful relationships and is mere pleasure Not all actions that a person takes have to be based on meaningful relationships. Someone can be promiscuous and have strong, healthy relationships with their friends and family. Just because they don't want to be monogamous at the moment doesn't mean that they are shallow or superficial. Secondly, I do a lot of things with other people that are strictly for the purposes of pleasure as opposed to developing meaningful relationships. I play online board games with strangers just to enjoy myself and I never pursue a relationship beyond occasionally texting \"gg\" at the end. It's fine because that's not the only way I interact with other people. \n\n\npromiscuous people let people do whatever they want with their body I disagree with this point. Agreeing to have sex with someone isn't agreeing to let them do whatever they want to their body, but agreeing to have certain types of intimate contact. For example, if Jane and Thomas meet up at a bar and decide to hook up, Jane might agree to have Thomas suck her nipples but not finger her anus and Thomas might be ok with receiving a blow job but not with being spanked. It's between the two of them what they want to do together in order to both have a safe and enjoyable time. If Jane wanted to peg Thomas, who didn't want that, and she did that anyway, that would be sexual assault, not promiscuity. If Thomas forced Jane to give him a blowjob, again, sexual assault.",
">\n\n\nAlso, promiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure\n\nBeing promiscuous and valuing personal relationships are not mutually exclusive at all. It doesn't take monogamy to value personal relationships. As someone in a long term open relationship, the fact that my partner and I both fuck other guys says very little about the value of our relationship.\n\nI think promiscuous people have a hard time valuing themselves since they let everyone to do whatever they want with their body. They are letting themselves be used.\n\nSpeaking as a slutty person I can tell you that being promiscuous doesn't mean people let everyone do whatever they want with their body (not that there's anything wrong with that). And consenting to sex with other consenting adults I guess is \"letting yourself be used,\" but it's not a bad thing. You're framing it as though people get nothing out of it. I have some fun, you have some fun, everybody wins and we all go on with life. There's nothing inherently bad about this.",
">\n\nThe first thing you have to accept is that the women of whom you speak are not dressing the way they do to seduce men; they are dressing that way to impress other women, and not in a lesbian way but rather in a one-up kind of way.",
">\n\nYou never explained why casual sex devalues someone. \nWhat’s the issue with someone who has sex with people because it feels good, it’s relaxing, and makes them feel good about themselves? Does everything have to be a higher level connection? So long as they use protection and it’s consensual, what’s the issue?\nIs masturbation devaluing yourself too? Since it’s just physical pleasure?\nWhat if you’re horny but don’t have anyone to be in a serious relationship with at the moment? You just shouldn’t have sex? Sex is a physical need in the same way as food, water, and shelter.",
">\n\nI don't know where you are from but here, sex is an act of pleasure many people participate in. To think that enjoying sex somehow makes you less valuable is hard for me to understand. I mean, we were all born wanting some you know? \nThe limit of one person to play with is inspired by religious institutions like the one famous for raping little boys or the one famous for not letting women drive work go to school or show ankles. Hardly role models we should follow. \nLive your life!",
">\n\nI don't lend someone my body when I have sex with them, or let them do whatever they want to me. And there's nothing about me (or about my partner) that is diminished in the act of sex. \nI'm sure there are promiscuous people who don't value themselves, but the are also chaste people who don't value themselves. Self respect isn't a matter of keeping everyone at a specific pre-defined distance, it's about setting and enforcing the boundaries that you want to have.",
">\n\nWhat doesn't make sense about promiscuous sex? Sex feels good. A lot of people are hot. You can think it's immoral but it's not exactly a paradox or a logic puzzle as to why people do it.",
">\n\nReplace the word \"sex\" in your comment with another mutually pleasurable two party activity like badminton or backgammon and see how insane you sound. From that I think you might be able to realise that the problem here is you have hang ups about sex and don't view it as a simple mutually pleasurable two party activity. Which is your cross to bear, but why should other people be forced to buy in to your hangups?",
">\n\n\n\"A person that has sex with many people lends their body to anyone.\"\n\nThis doesn't follow. It's an artifact of binary thinking where EITHER you have sex only in the context of at most ONE committed romantic relationship, or else you \"lend your body to anyone\". \nBut the world isn't binary like that.\nI have 4 current sex-partners: two girlfriends and two friends with benefits. All of these people are among the people closest to me, and have been for many years; I've for example known both my girlfriends for about 8 years.\nIn my subculture, most people see nothing at all wrong with having multiple partners. Values like honesty and openness are crucial, but there's no conflict at all about that; all of my sex-partners know about each other and indeed most of them are friends. (Nor is that limited to me; both my girlfriends have two other partners each.)\nI see the opposite of devaluing ourselves in this. I see a willingness to live life honestly as the people we are, even if some of it causes parts of mainstream society to get their panties in a twist about it. \n\nEven if they are picky lots of people can have access to a very intimate part of them\n\nIf you define anything above 1 as \"lots\" then sure. But is that reasonable? Isn't that another example of amatonormativity, of pretending there's some kinda logical reason why ONE is the only acceptable number of sex-partners, and anything above that automatically is equivalent to \"lots\", regardless of how picky people are?\n\npromiscuous behaviour doesn't really make sense, it's too superficial. It doesn't value personal relationships, it's all mere pleasure.\n\nIs there something inherently wrong with pleasure? Yes some people enjoy having sex that is not part of a deeper relationship. Assuming they do this in an open and honest way: are they harming anyone by it? Is it objectionable in any way? If so, why?\nBut this isn't necessarily the case for all people who have multiple partners. I care deeply about all the people I have sex with, and I'm in committed romantic relationships with my two girlfriends. The relationships are not shallower or more superficial than the monogamous relationships I had earlier in my life; including a 16 year long marriage that I had.\nOne of the women I love has been in my life for 14 years. We've been each others pillar of support through some of the hardest things that's ever happened to either of us. And I have every expectation that we'll love each other for ever. And yet this particular relationship is not sexual and we've never as much as kissed. So where's the support for the idea that it's all mere pleasure and there's no value put on personal relationships?"
] |
Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.
- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod
- PC plate
- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock
- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex
- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot | [] |
>
so how much did it all cost | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot"
] |
>
Without switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit. | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost"
] |
>
Specs? What am I listening to? | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit."
] |
>
Just updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?"
] |
>
That sounds nice. | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding"
] |
>
indeed. especially for under $100 | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice."
] |
>
Thats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (: | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100"
] |
>
With the right switches, this sounds even betterrrr | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100",
">\n\nThats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (:"
] |
>
Kbd67 lite | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100",
">\n\nThats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (:",
">\n\nWith the right switches, this sounds even betterrrr"
] |
>
That's plastic. This's aluminum. Big difference | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100",
">\n\nThats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (:",
">\n\nWith the right switches, this sounds even betterrrr",
">\n\nKbd67 lite"
] |
>
I suppose you get a better quality board for the money. Personally I prefer the plastic case | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100",
">\n\nThats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (:",
">\n\nWith the right switches, this sounds even betterrrr",
">\n\nKbd67 lite",
">\n\nThat's plastic. This's aluminum. Big difference"
] |
>
Understandable. Plastic board does have distinctive characteristics | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100",
">\n\nThats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (:",
">\n\nWith the right switches, this sounds even betterrrr",
">\n\nKbd67 lite",
">\n\nThat's plastic. This's aluminum. Big difference",
">\n\nI suppose you get a better quality board for the money. Personally I prefer the plastic case"
] |
>
Did you get it from the fancylab store? I've been wanting to get it just for those keycaps lol. Are they any good? | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100",
">\n\nThats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (:",
">\n\nWith the right switches, this sounds even betterrrr",
">\n\nKbd67 lite",
">\n\nThat's plastic. This's aluminum. Big difference",
">\n\nI suppose you get a better quality board for the money. Personally I prefer the plastic case",
">\n\nUnderstandable. Plastic board does have distinctive characteristics"
] |
>
Yeah, kinda. Fancytech Fancylab Finalkey I believe they are the same. They are super good if you think this is complementary with the $95 kit. Now, the keycap itself is decent. That translucent look is only available at higher price range from kbdfans I guess | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100",
">\n\nThats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (:",
">\n\nWith the right switches, this sounds even betterrrr",
">\n\nKbd67 lite",
">\n\nThat's plastic. This's aluminum. Big difference",
">\n\nI suppose you get a better quality board for the money. Personally I prefer the plastic case",
">\n\nUnderstandable. Plastic board does have distinctive characteristics",
">\n\nDid you get it from the fancylab store? I've been wanting to get it just for those keycaps lol. Are they any good?"
] |
>
Are there any quieter mks? | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100",
">\n\nThats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (:",
">\n\nWith the right switches, this sounds even betterrrr",
">\n\nKbd67 lite",
">\n\nThat's plastic. This's aluminum. Big difference",
">\n\nI suppose you get a better quality board for the money. Personally I prefer the plastic case",
">\n\nUnderstandable. Plastic board does have distinctive characteristics",
">\n\nDid you get it from the fancylab store? I've been wanting to get it just for those keycaps lol. Are they any good?",
">\n\nYeah, kinda. Fancytech Fancylab Finalkey I believe they are the same. They are super good if you think this is complementary with the $95 kit. Now, the keycap itself is decent. That translucent look is only available at higher price range from kbdfans I guess"
] |
>
You only need to change the switches to make the keeb quieter, not the kit itself. This kit is not the loudest btw. | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100",
">\n\nThats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (:",
">\n\nWith the right switches, this sounds even betterrrr",
">\n\nKbd67 lite",
">\n\nThat's plastic. This's aluminum. Big difference",
">\n\nI suppose you get a better quality board for the money. Personally I prefer the plastic case",
">\n\nUnderstandable. Plastic board does have distinctive characteristics",
">\n\nDid you get it from the fancylab store? I've been wanting to get it just for those keycaps lol. Are they any good?",
">\n\nYeah, kinda. Fancytech Fancylab Finalkey I believe they are the same. They are super good if you think this is complementary with the $95 kit. Now, the keycap itself is decent. That translucent look is only available at higher price range from kbdfans I guess",
">\n\nAre there any quieter mks?"
] |
>
Keycaps are 🔥🔥🔥 | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100",
">\n\nThats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (:",
">\n\nWith the right switches, this sounds even betterrrr",
">\n\nKbd67 lite",
">\n\nThat's plastic. This's aluminum. Big difference",
">\n\nI suppose you get a better quality board for the money. Personally I prefer the plastic case",
">\n\nUnderstandable. Plastic board does have distinctive characteristics",
">\n\nDid you get it from the fancylab store? I've been wanting to get it just for those keycaps lol. Are they any good?",
">\n\nYeah, kinda. Fancytech Fancylab Finalkey I believe they are the same. They are super good if you think this is complementary with the $95 kit. Now, the keycap itself is decent. That translucent look is only available at higher price range from kbdfans I guess",
">\n\nAre there any quieter mks?",
">\n\nYou only need to change the switches to make the keeb quieter, not the kit itself. This kit is not the loudest btw."
] |
>
true true trueeee | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100",
">\n\nThats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (:",
">\n\nWith the right switches, this sounds even betterrrr",
">\n\nKbd67 lite",
">\n\nThat's plastic. This's aluminum. Big difference",
">\n\nI suppose you get a better quality board for the money. Personally I prefer the plastic case",
">\n\nUnderstandable. Plastic board does have distinctive characteristics",
">\n\nDid you get it from the fancylab store? I've been wanting to get it just for those keycaps lol. Are they any good?",
">\n\nYeah, kinda. Fancytech Fancylab Finalkey I believe they are the same. They are super good if you think this is complementary with the $95 kit. Now, the keycap itself is decent. That translucent look is only available at higher price range from kbdfans I guess",
">\n\nAre there any quieter mks?",
">\n\nYou only need to change the switches to make the keeb quieter, not the kit itself. This kit is not the loudest btw.",
">\n\nKeycaps are 🔥🔥🔥"
] |
>
Damn that nice | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100",
">\n\nThats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (:",
">\n\nWith the right switches, this sounds even betterrrr",
">\n\nKbd67 lite",
">\n\nThat's plastic. This's aluminum. Big difference",
">\n\nI suppose you get a better quality board for the money. Personally I prefer the plastic case",
">\n\nUnderstandable. Plastic board does have distinctive characteristics",
">\n\nDid you get it from the fancylab store? I've been wanting to get it just for those keycaps lol. Are they any good?",
">\n\nYeah, kinda. Fancytech Fancylab Finalkey I believe they are the same. They are super good if you think this is complementary with the $95 kit. Now, the keycap itself is decent. That translucent look is only available at higher price range from kbdfans I guess",
">\n\nAre there any quieter mks?",
">\n\nYou only need to change the switches to make the keeb quieter, not the kit itself. This kit is not the loudest btw.",
">\n\nKeycaps are 🔥🔥🔥",
">\n\ntrue true trueeee"
] |
>
thank you :) | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100",
">\n\nThats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (:",
">\n\nWith the right switches, this sounds even betterrrr",
">\n\nKbd67 lite",
">\n\nThat's plastic. This's aluminum. Big difference",
">\n\nI suppose you get a better quality board for the money. Personally I prefer the plastic case",
">\n\nUnderstandable. Plastic board does have distinctive characteristics",
">\n\nDid you get it from the fancylab store? I've been wanting to get it just for those keycaps lol. Are they any good?",
">\n\nYeah, kinda. Fancytech Fancylab Finalkey I believe they are the same. They are super good if you think this is complementary with the $95 kit. Now, the keycap itself is decent. That translucent look is only available at higher price range from kbdfans I guess",
">\n\nAre there any quieter mks?",
">\n\nYou only need to change the switches to make the keeb quieter, not the kit itself. This kit is not the loudest btw.",
">\n\nKeycaps are 🔥🔥🔥",
">\n\ntrue true trueeee",
">\n\nDamn that nice"
] |
>
Hi all, we as Iconlabs will open a second groupbuy/pre-order of this keyboard kit in the next 3 days. For those who missed the previous one, this is now your chance :D | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100",
">\n\nThats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (:",
">\n\nWith the right switches, this sounds even betterrrr",
">\n\nKbd67 lite",
">\n\nThat's plastic. This's aluminum. Big difference",
">\n\nI suppose you get a better quality board for the money. Personally I prefer the plastic case",
">\n\nUnderstandable. Plastic board does have distinctive characteristics",
">\n\nDid you get it from the fancylab store? I've been wanting to get it just for those keycaps lol. Are they any good?",
">\n\nYeah, kinda. Fancytech Fancylab Finalkey I believe they are the same. They are super good if you think this is complementary with the $95 kit. Now, the keycap itself is decent. That translucent look is only available at higher price range from kbdfans I guess",
">\n\nAre there any quieter mks?",
">\n\nYou only need to change the switches to make the keeb quieter, not the kit itself. This kit is not the loudest btw.",
">\n\nKeycaps are 🔥🔥🔥",
">\n\ntrue true trueeee",
">\n\nDamn that nice",
">\n\nthank you :)"
] |
>
Is the "Cidoo V65" that's only available in a beige color the same board? | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100",
">\n\nThats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (:",
">\n\nWith the right switches, this sounds even betterrrr",
">\n\nKbd67 lite",
">\n\nThat's plastic. This's aluminum. Big difference",
">\n\nI suppose you get a better quality board for the money. Personally I prefer the plastic case",
">\n\nUnderstandable. Plastic board does have distinctive characteristics",
">\n\nDid you get it from the fancylab store? I've been wanting to get it just for those keycaps lol. Are they any good?",
">\n\nYeah, kinda. Fancytech Fancylab Finalkey I believe they are the same. They are super good if you think this is complementary with the $95 kit. Now, the keycap itself is decent. That translucent look is only available at higher price range from kbdfans I guess",
">\n\nAre there any quieter mks?",
">\n\nYou only need to change the switches to make the keeb quieter, not the kit itself. This kit is not the loudest btw.",
">\n\nKeycaps are 🔥🔥🔥",
">\n\ntrue true trueeee",
">\n\nDamn that nice",
">\n\nthank you :)",
">\n\nHi all, we as Iconlabs will open a second groupbuy/pre-order of this keyboard kit in the next 3 days. For those who missed the previous one, this is now your chance :D"
] |
>
Pretty the same. A recover version of the Cidoo. I'm not sure if the Cidoo has included keycaps? | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100",
">\n\nThats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (:",
">\n\nWith the right switches, this sounds even betterrrr",
">\n\nKbd67 lite",
">\n\nThat's plastic. This's aluminum. Big difference",
">\n\nI suppose you get a better quality board for the money. Personally I prefer the plastic case",
">\n\nUnderstandable. Plastic board does have distinctive characteristics",
">\n\nDid you get it from the fancylab store? I've been wanting to get it just for those keycaps lol. Are they any good?",
">\n\nYeah, kinda. Fancytech Fancylab Finalkey I believe they are the same. They are super good if you think this is complementary with the $95 kit. Now, the keycap itself is decent. That translucent look is only available at higher price range from kbdfans I guess",
">\n\nAre there any quieter mks?",
">\n\nYou only need to change the switches to make the keeb quieter, not the kit itself. This kit is not the loudest btw.",
">\n\nKeycaps are 🔥🔥🔥",
">\n\ntrue true trueeee",
">\n\nDamn that nice",
">\n\nthank you :)",
">\n\nHi all, we as Iconlabs will open a second groupbuy/pre-order of this keyboard kit in the next 3 days. For those who missed the previous one, this is now your chance :D",
">\n\nIs the \"Cidoo V65\" that's only available in a beige color the same board?"
] |
>
Yes, they seem to have their own "retro" colorway for the Cidoo board, and different stabs.
Does this one have screws hidden under adhesive feet too? | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100",
">\n\nThats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (:",
">\n\nWith the right switches, this sounds even betterrrr",
">\n\nKbd67 lite",
">\n\nThat's plastic. This's aluminum. Big difference",
">\n\nI suppose you get a better quality board for the money. Personally I prefer the plastic case",
">\n\nUnderstandable. Plastic board does have distinctive characteristics",
">\n\nDid you get it from the fancylab store? I've been wanting to get it just for those keycaps lol. Are they any good?",
">\n\nYeah, kinda. Fancytech Fancylab Finalkey I believe they are the same. They are super good if you think this is complementary with the $95 kit. Now, the keycap itself is decent. That translucent look is only available at higher price range from kbdfans I guess",
">\n\nAre there any quieter mks?",
">\n\nYou only need to change the switches to make the keeb quieter, not the kit itself. This kit is not the loudest btw.",
">\n\nKeycaps are 🔥🔥🔥",
">\n\ntrue true trueeee",
">\n\nDamn that nice",
">\n\nthank you :)",
">\n\nHi all, we as Iconlabs will open a second groupbuy/pre-order of this keyboard kit in the next 3 days. For those who missed the previous one, this is now your chance :D",
">\n\nIs the \"Cidoo V65\" that's only available in a beige color the same board?",
">\n\nPretty the same. A recover version of the Cidoo. I'm not sure if the Cidoo has included keycaps?"
] |
>
Any plans for a full standalone kit of the keycaps? | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100",
">\n\nThats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (:",
">\n\nWith the right switches, this sounds even betterrrr",
">\n\nKbd67 lite",
">\n\nThat's plastic. This's aluminum. Big difference",
">\n\nI suppose you get a better quality board for the money. Personally I prefer the plastic case",
">\n\nUnderstandable. Plastic board does have distinctive characteristics",
">\n\nDid you get it from the fancylab store? I've been wanting to get it just for those keycaps lol. Are they any good?",
">\n\nYeah, kinda. Fancytech Fancylab Finalkey I believe they are the same. They are super good if you think this is complementary with the $95 kit. Now, the keycap itself is decent. That translucent look is only available at higher price range from kbdfans I guess",
">\n\nAre there any quieter mks?",
">\n\nYou only need to change the switches to make the keeb quieter, not the kit itself. This kit is not the loudest btw.",
">\n\nKeycaps are 🔥🔥🔥",
">\n\ntrue true trueeee",
">\n\nDamn that nice",
">\n\nthank you :)",
">\n\nHi all, we as Iconlabs will open a second groupbuy/pre-order of this keyboard kit in the next 3 days. For those who missed the previous one, this is now your chance :D",
">\n\nIs the \"Cidoo V65\" that's only available in a beige color the same board?",
">\n\nPretty the same. A recover version of the Cidoo. I'm not sure if the Cidoo has included keycaps?",
">\n\nYes, they seem to have their own \"retro\" colorway for the Cidoo board, and different stabs.\nDoes this one have screws hidden under adhesive feet too?"
] |
>
Yes actually. We are dealing with the maker for this. The manufacturing is almost complete | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100",
">\n\nThats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (:",
">\n\nWith the right switches, this sounds even betterrrr",
">\n\nKbd67 lite",
">\n\nThat's plastic. This's aluminum. Big difference",
">\n\nI suppose you get a better quality board for the money. Personally I prefer the plastic case",
">\n\nUnderstandable. Plastic board does have distinctive characteristics",
">\n\nDid you get it from the fancylab store? I've been wanting to get it just for those keycaps lol. Are they any good?",
">\n\nYeah, kinda. Fancytech Fancylab Finalkey I believe they are the same. They are super good if you think this is complementary with the $95 kit. Now, the keycap itself is decent. That translucent look is only available at higher price range from kbdfans I guess",
">\n\nAre there any quieter mks?",
">\n\nYou only need to change the switches to make the keeb quieter, not the kit itself. This kit is not the loudest btw.",
">\n\nKeycaps are 🔥🔥🔥",
">\n\ntrue true trueeee",
">\n\nDamn that nice",
">\n\nthank you :)",
">\n\nHi all, we as Iconlabs will open a second groupbuy/pre-order of this keyboard kit in the next 3 days. For those who missed the previous one, this is now your chance :D",
">\n\nIs the \"Cidoo V65\" that's only available in a beige color the same board?",
">\n\nPretty the same. A recover version of the Cidoo. I'm not sure if the Cidoo has included keycaps?",
">\n\nYes, they seem to have their own \"retro\" colorway for the Cidoo board, and different stabs.\nDoes this one have screws hidden under adhesive feet too?",
">\n\nAny plans for a full standalone kit of the keycaps?"
] |
>
Nice, how much would it cost? | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100",
">\n\nThats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (:",
">\n\nWith the right switches, this sounds even betterrrr",
">\n\nKbd67 lite",
">\n\nThat's plastic. This's aluminum. Big difference",
">\n\nI suppose you get a better quality board for the money. Personally I prefer the plastic case",
">\n\nUnderstandable. Plastic board does have distinctive characteristics",
">\n\nDid you get it from the fancylab store? I've been wanting to get it just for those keycaps lol. Are they any good?",
">\n\nYeah, kinda. Fancytech Fancylab Finalkey I believe they are the same. They are super good if you think this is complementary with the $95 kit. Now, the keycap itself is decent. That translucent look is only available at higher price range from kbdfans I guess",
">\n\nAre there any quieter mks?",
">\n\nYou only need to change the switches to make the keeb quieter, not the kit itself. This kit is not the loudest btw.",
">\n\nKeycaps are 🔥🔥🔥",
">\n\ntrue true trueeee",
">\n\nDamn that nice",
">\n\nthank you :)",
">\n\nHi all, we as Iconlabs will open a second groupbuy/pre-order of this keyboard kit in the next 3 days. For those who missed the previous one, this is now your chance :D",
">\n\nIs the \"Cidoo V65\" that's only available in a beige color the same board?",
">\n\nPretty the same. A recover version of the Cidoo. I'm not sure if the Cidoo has included keycaps?",
">\n\nYes, they seem to have their own \"retro\" colorway for the Cidoo board, and different stabs.\nDoes this one have screws hidden under adhesive feet too?",
">\n\nAny plans for a full standalone kit of the keycaps?",
">\n\nYes actually. We are dealing with the maker for this. The manufacturing is almost complete"
] |
>
Around $50 maximum 😎 | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100",
">\n\nThats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (:",
">\n\nWith the right switches, this sounds even betterrrr",
">\n\nKbd67 lite",
">\n\nThat's plastic. This's aluminum. Big difference",
">\n\nI suppose you get a better quality board for the money. Personally I prefer the plastic case",
">\n\nUnderstandable. Plastic board does have distinctive characteristics",
">\n\nDid you get it from the fancylab store? I've been wanting to get it just for those keycaps lol. Are they any good?",
">\n\nYeah, kinda. Fancytech Fancylab Finalkey I believe they are the same. They are super good if you think this is complementary with the $95 kit. Now, the keycap itself is decent. That translucent look is only available at higher price range from kbdfans I guess",
">\n\nAre there any quieter mks?",
">\n\nYou only need to change the switches to make the keeb quieter, not the kit itself. This kit is not the loudest btw.",
">\n\nKeycaps are 🔥🔥🔥",
">\n\ntrue true trueeee",
">\n\nDamn that nice",
">\n\nthank you :)",
">\n\nHi all, we as Iconlabs will open a second groupbuy/pre-order of this keyboard kit in the next 3 days. For those who missed the previous one, this is now your chance :D",
">\n\nIs the \"Cidoo V65\" that's only available in a beige color the same board?",
">\n\nPretty the same. A recover version of the Cidoo. I'm not sure if the Cidoo has included keycaps?",
">\n\nYes, they seem to have their own \"retro\" colorway for the Cidoo board, and different stabs.\nDoes this one have screws hidden under adhesive feet too?",
">\n\nAny plans for a full standalone kit of the keycaps?",
">\n\nYes actually. We are dealing with the maker for this. The manufacturing is almost complete",
">\n\nNice, how much would it cost?"
] |
>
Nice do you guys have a site/waitlist or something to keep track of this? | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100",
">\n\nThats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (:",
">\n\nWith the right switches, this sounds even betterrrr",
">\n\nKbd67 lite",
">\n\nThat's plastic. This's aluminum. Big difference",
">\n\nI suppose you get a better quality board for the money. Personally I prefer the plastic case",
">\n\nUnderstandable. Plastic board does have distinctive characteristics",
">\n\nDid you get it from the fancylab store? I've been wanting to get it just for those keycaps lol. Are they any good?",
">\n\nYeah, kinda. Fancytech Fancylab Finalkey I believe they are the same. They are super good if you think this is complementary with the $95 kit. Now, the keycap itself is decent. That translucent look is only available at higher price range from kbdfans I guess",
">\n\nAre there any quieter mks?",
">\n\nYou only need to change the switches to make the keeb quieter, not the kit itself. This kit is not the loudest btw.",
">\n\nKeycaps are 🔥🔥🔥",
">\n\ntrue true trueeee",
">\n\nDamn that nice",
">\n\nthank you :)",
">\n\nHi all, we as Iconlabs will open a second groupbuy/pre-order of this keyboard kit in the next 3 days. For those who missed the previous one, this is now your chance :D",
">\n\nIs the \"Cidoo V65\" that's only available in a beige color the same board?",
">\n\nPretty the same. A recover version of the Cidoo. I'm not sure if the Cidoo has included keycaps?",
">\n\nYes, they seem to have their own \"retro\" colorway for the Cidoo board, and different stabs.\nDoes this one have screws hidden under adhesive feet too?",
">\n\nAny plans for a full standalone kit of the keycaps?",
">\n\nYes actually. We are dealing with the maker for this. The manufacturing is almost complete",
">\n\nNice, how much would it cost?",
">\n\nAround $50 maximum 😎"
] |
>
I've heard the keycaps provided are really horrible. Are they really? | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100",
">\n\nThats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (:",
">\n\nWith the right switches, this sounds even betterrrr",
">\n\nKbd67 lite",
">\n\nThat's plastic. This's aluminum. Big difference",
">\n\nI suppose you get a better quality board for the money. Personally I prefer the plastic case",
">\n\nUnderstandable. Plastic board does have distinctive characteristics",
">\n\nDid you get it from the fancylab store? I've been wanting to get it just for those keycaps lol. Are they any good?",
">\n\nYeah, kinda. Fancytech Fancylab Finalkey I believe they are the same. They are super good if you think this is complementary with the $95 kit. Now, the keycap itself is decent. That translucent look is only available at higher price range from kbdfans I guess",
">\n\nAre there any quieter mks?",
">\n\nYou only need to change the switches to make the keeb quieter, not the kit itself. This kit is not the loudest btw.",
">\n\nKeycaps are 🔥🔥🔥",
">\n\ntrue true trueeee",
">\n\nDamn that nice",
">\n\nthank you :)",
">\n\nHi all, we as Iconlabs will open a second groupbuy/pre-order of this keyboard kit in the next 3 days. For those who missed the previous one, this is now your chance :D",
">\n\nIs the \"Cidoo V65\" that's only available in a beige color the same board?",
">\n\nPretty the same. A recover version of the Cidoo. I'm not sure if the Cidoo has included keycaps?",
">\n\nYes, they seem to have their own \"retro\" colorway for the Cidoo board, and different stabs.\nDoes this one have screws hidden under adhesive feet too?",
">\n\nAny plans for a full standalone kit of the keycaps?",
">\n\nYes actually. We are dealing with the maker for this. The manufacturing is almost complete",
">\n\nNice, how much would it cost?",
">\n\nAround $50 maximum 😎",
">\n\nNice do you guys have a site/waitlist or something to keep track of this?"
] |
>
Not sure why it gets some rumors like that. Personally, I love how it looks. The build quality is fine, can't complain anything about it. | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100",
">\n\nThats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (:",
">\n\nWith the right switches, this sounds even betterrrr",
">\n\nKbd67 lite",
">\n\nThat's plastic. This's aluminum. Big difference",
">\n\nI suppose you get a better quality board for the money. Personally I prefer the plastic case",
">\n\nUnderstandable. Plastic board does have distinctive characteristics",
">\n\nDid you get it from the fancylab store? I've been wanting to get it just for those keycaps lol. Are they any good?",
">\n\nYeah, kinda. Fancytech Fancylab Finalkey I believe they are the same. They are super good if you think this is complementary with the $95 kit. Now, the keycap itself is decent. That translucent look is only available at higher price range from kbdfans I guess",
">\n\nAre there any quieter mks?",
">\n\nYou only need to change the switches to make the keeb quieter, not the kit itself. This kit is not the loudest btw.",
">\n\nKeycaps are 🔥🔥🔥",
">\n\ntrue true trueeee",
">\n\nDamn that nice",
">\n\nthank you :)",
">\n\nHi all, we as Iconlabs will open a second groupbuy/pre-order of this keyboard kit in the next 3 days. For those who missed the previous one, this is now your chance :D",
">\n\nIs the \"Cidoo V65\" that's only available in a beige color the same board?",
">\n\nPretty the same. A recover version of the Cidoo. I'm not sure if the Cidoo has included keycaps?",
">\n\nYes, they seem to have their own \"retro\" colorway for the Cidoo board, and different stabs.\nDoes this one have screws hidden under adhesive feet too?",
">\n\nAny plans for a full standalone kit of the keycaps?",
">\n\nYes actually. We are dealing with the maker for this. The manufacturing is almost complete",
">\n\nNice, how much would it cost?",
">\n\nAround $50 maximum 😎",
">\n\nNice do you guys have a site/waitlist or something to keep track of this?",
">\n\nI've heard the keycaps provided are really horrible. Are they really?"
] |
>
Well that's good to hear. Also can you tell me the weight of the board, built/unbuilt? | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100",
">\n\nThats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (:",
">\n\nWith the right switches, this sounds even betterrrr",
">\n\nKbd67 lite",
">\n\nThat's plastic. This's aluminum. Big difference",
">\n\nI suppose you get a better quality board for the money. Personally I prefer the plastic case",
">\n\nUnderstandable. Plastic board does have distinctive characteristics",
">\n\nDid you get it from the fancylab store? I've been wanting to get it just for those keycaps lol. Are they any good?",
">\n\nYeah, kinda. Fancytech Fancylab Finalkey I believe they are the same. They are super good if you think this is complementary with the $95 kit. Now, the keycap itself is decent. That translucent look is only available at higher price range from kbdfans I guess",
">\n\nAre there any quieter mks?",
">\n\nYou only need to change the switches to make the keeb quieter, not the kit itself. This kit is not the loudest btw.",
">\n\nKeycaps are 🔥🔥🔥",
">\n\ntrue true trueeee",
">\n\nDamn that nice",
">\n\nthank you :)",
">\n\nHi all, we as Iconlabs will open a second groupbuy/pre-order of this keyboard kit in the next 3 days. For those who missed the previous one, this is now your chance :D",
">\n\nIs the \"Cidoo V65\" that's only available in a beige color the same board?",
">\n\nPretty the same. A recover version of the Cidoo. I'm not sure if the Cidoo has included keycaps?",
">\n\nYes, they seem to have their own \"retro\" colorway for the Cidoo board, and different stabs.\nDoes this one have screws hidden under adhesive feet too?",
">\n\nAny plans for a full standalone kit of the keycaps?",
">\n\nYes actually. We are dealing with the maker for this. The manufacturing is almost complete",
">\n\nNice, how much would it cost?",
">\n\nAround $50 maximum 😎",
">\n\nNice do you guys have a site/waitlist or something to keep track of this?",
">\n\nI've heard the keycaps provided are really horrible. Are they really?",
">\n\nNot sure why it gets some rumors like that. Personally, I love how it looks. The build quality is fine, can't complain anything about it."
] |
> | [
"Sorry, I forgot the specs after uploading the video.\n- V65 R2 full provided foam and 1 layer tape mod\n- PC plate\n- Switch Gateron Modern Gray stock\n- Provided stabs get wires tuned and lubed with BDZ and permatex\n- Provided translucent keycap, ABS doubleshot",
">\n\nso how much did it all cost",
">\n\nWithout switches, it's $95. The switches I use is around $26 for the whole kit.",
">\n\nSpecs? What am I listening to?",
">\n\nJust updated with my specs :) thanks for reminding",
">\n\nThat sounds nice.",
">\n\nindeed. especially for under $100",
">\n\nThats an awesome kb! And the sounds very pleasing (:",
">\n\nWith the right switches, this sounds even betterrrr",
">\n\nKbd67 lite",
">\n\nThat's plastic. This's aluminum. Big difference",
">\n\nI suppose you get a better quality board for the money. Personally I prefer the plastic case",
">\n\nUnderstandable. Plastic board does have distinctive characteristics",
">\n\nDid you get it from the fancylab store? I've been wanting to get it just for those keycaps lol. Are they any good?",
">\n\nYeah, kinda. Fancytech Fancylab Finalkey I believe they are the same. They are super good if you think this is complementary with the $95 kit. Now, the keycap itself is decent. That translucent look is only available at higher price range from kbdfans I guess",
">\n\nAre there any quieter mks?",
">\n\nYou only need to change the switches to make the keeb quieter, not the kit itself. This kit is not the loudest btw.",
">\n\nKeycaps are 🔥🔥🔥",
">\n\ntrue true trueeee",
">\n\nDamn that nice",
">\n\nthank you :)",
">\n\nHi all, we as Iconlabs will open a second groupbuy/pre-order of this keyboard kit in the next 3 days. For those who missed the previous one, this is now your chance :D",
">\n\nIs the \"Cidoo V65\" that's only available in a beige color the same board?",
">\n\nPretty the same. A recover version of the Cidoo. I'm not sure if the Cidoo has included keycaps?",
">\n\nYes, they seem to have their own \"retro\" colorway for the Cidoo board, and different stabs.\nDoes this one have screws hidden under adhesive feet too?",
">\n\nAny plans for a full standalone kit of the keycaps?",
">\n\nYes actually. We are dealing with the maker for this. The manufacturing is almost complete",
">\n\nNice, how much would it cost?",
">\n\nAround $50 maximum 😎",
">\n\nNice do you guys have a site/waitlist or something to keep track of this?",
">\n\nI've heard the keycaps provided are really horrible. Are they really?",
">\n\nNot sure why it gets some rumors like that. Personally, I love how it looks. The build quality is fine, can't complain anything about it.",
">\n\nWell that's good to hear. Also can you tell me the weight of the board, built/unbuilt?"
] |
They could grow lettuce and make more money than cannabis now... | [] |
>
Is it difficult to make money on growing weed in general or for them especially? | [
"They could grow lettuce and make more money than cannabis now..."
] |
>
Them especially. | [
"They could grow lettuce and make more money than cannabis now...",
">\n\nIs it difficult to make money on growing weed in general or for them especially?"
] |
>
Oh god, I'd forgotten about that. What a boondoggle. | [
"They could grow lettuce and make more money than cannabis now...",
">\n\nIs it difficult to make money on growing weed in general or for them especially?",
">\n\nThem especially."
] |
>
"What? Yeah, man, I'll get to it..." | [
"They could grow lettuce and make more money than cannabis now...",
">\n\nIs it difficult to make money on growing weed in general or for them especially?",
">\n\nThem especially.",
">\n\nOh god, I'd forgotten about that. What a boondoggle."
] |
>
I'll buy it for tree fiddy | [
"They could grow lettuce and make more money than cannabis now...",
">\n\nIs it difficult to make money on growing weed in general or for them especially?",
">\n\nThem especially.",
">\n\nOh god, I'd forgotten about that. What a boondoggle.",
">\n\n\"What? Yeah, man, I'll get to it...\""
] |
>
Now don’t start wit no tree fiddy! Start wit won sevem figh! | [
"They could grow lettuce and make more money than cannabis now...",
">\n\nIs it difficult to make money on growing weed in general or for them especially?",
">\n\nThem especially.",
">\n\nOh god, I'd forgotten about that. What a boondoggle.",
">\n\n\"What? Yeah, man, I'll get to it...\"",
">\n\nI'll buy it for tree fiddy"
] |
> | [
"They could grow lettuce and make more money than cannabis now...",
">\n\nIs it difficult to make money on growing weed in general or for them especially?",
">\n\nThem especially.",
">\n\nOh god, I'd forgotten about that. What a boondoggle.",
">\n\n\"What? Yeah, man, I'll get to it...\"",
">\n\nI'll buy it for tree fiddy",
">\n\nNow don’t start wit no tree fiddy! Start wit won sevem figh!"
] |
Russia gave up on the war long ago.
Now they are just terrorists. | [] |
>
Terrorist cowards, while running away from the Ukraine army, continue to perpetrate war crimes against the civilian population. | [
"Russia gave up on the war long ago.\nNow they are just terrorists."
] |
>
Russians are monsters. | [
"Russia gave up on the war long ago.\nNow they are just terrorists.",
">\n\nTerrorist cowards, while running away from the Ukraine army, continue to perpetrate war crimes against the civilian population."
] |
> | [
"Russia gave up on the war long ago.\nNow they are just terrorists.",
">\n\nTerrorist cowards, while running away from the Ukraine army, continue to perpetrate war crimes against the civilian population.",
">\n\nRussians are monsters."
] |
Hey there i'm a cable maker from germany. I started making cables in 2019 as a hobby, which grew and became my fulltime job in 2021. Since then i made over 4.000 handmade custom cables for the community and many collabs with designers and makers. So... i like em :) | [] |
>
Nice they’re LEMO connectors, LEMO is a Swiss brand! | [
"Hey there i'm a cable maker from germany. I started making cables in 2019 as a hobby, which grew and became my fulltime job in 2021. Since then i made over 4.000 handmade custom cables for the community and many collabs with designers and makers. So... i like em :)"
] |
> | [
"Hey there i'm a cable maker from germany. I started making cables in 2019 as a hobby, which grew and became my fulltime job in 2021. Since then i made over 4.000 handmade custom cables for the community and many collabs with designers and makers. So... i like em :)",
">\n\nNice they’re LEMO connectors, LEMO is a Swiss brand!"
] |
Would t that be called « No Trousers Day »? I thought « pants » WERE underwear in British English. | [] |
>
Came to say this exact thing.
Also, who the fuck thought January is the right month for this? | [
"Would t that be called « No Trousers Day »? I thought « pants » WERE underwear in British English."
] |
>
Well the origin is in the USA. It started as the "No Pants Subway Ride" done by the Improv Anywhere group. It's since spread. The entire idea is about the implicit absurdity so it's done in January for just that reason. | [
"Would t that be called « No Trousers Day »? I thought « pants » WERE underwear in British English.",
">\n\nCame to say this exact thing.\nAlso, who the fuck thought January is the right month for this?"
] |
>
The only time I ditch bottoms is when they get too clingy. Daddy's on his own path, honey. | [
"Would t that be called « No Trousers Day »? I thought « pants » WERE underwear in British English.",
">\n\nCame to say this exact thing.\nAlso, who the fuck thought January is the right month for this?",
">\n\nWell the origin is in the USA. It started as the \"No Pants Subway Ride\" done by the Improv Anywhere group. It's since spread. The entire idea is about the implicit absurdity so it's done in January for just that reason."
] |
>
A bottom isn't just for Christmas hun! | [
"Would t that be called « No Trousers Day »? I thought « pants » WERE underwear in British English.",
">\n\nCame to say this exact thing.\nAlso, who the fuck thought January is the right month for this?",
">\n\nWell the origin is in the USA. It started as the \"No Pants Subway Ride\" done by the Improv Anywhere group. It's since spread. The entire idea is about the implicit absurdity so it's done in January for just that reason.",
">\n\nThe only time I ditch bottoms is when they get too clingy. Daddy's on his own path, honey."
] |
>
My only issue with this is it seems like a bad time of year for it, this definitely feels like a spring/summer kind of thing so your not almost literally freezing your ass off | [
"Would t that be called « No Trousers Day »? I thought « pants » WERE underwear in British English.",
">\n\nCame to say this exact thing.\nAlso, who the fuck thought January is the right month for this?",
">\n\nWell the origin is in the USA. It started as the \"No Pants Subway Ride\" done by the Improv Anywhere group. It's since spread. The entire idea is about the implicit absurdity so it's done in January for just that reason.",
">\n\nThe only time I ditch bottoms is when they get too clingy. Daddy's on his own path, honey.",
">\n\nA bottom isn't just for Christmas hun!"
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.